From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Melnitzky v. Nathanson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 9, 2004
13 A.D.3d 131 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

4861.

December 9, 2004.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered November 6, 2003, which granted defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.


The malpractice claim that defendant attorney's conduct was the "but for" cause of plaintiff's losses was speculative ( see Alter Alter v. Cannella, 284 AD2d 138, 139), it reflected nonactionable strategic choices ( see Iocovello v. Weingrad Weingrad, 4 AD3d 208), and, as to the claimed failure to plead defamation, was entirely conclusory ( see Gonzalez v. Lombardino, 301 AD2d 437).


Summaries of

Melnitzky v. Nathanson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 9, 2004
13 A.D.3d 131 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Melnitzky v. Nathanson

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL MELNITZKY, Appellant, v. EUGENE NATHANSON, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 9, 2004

Citations

13 A.D.3d 131 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
785 N.Y.S.2d 688

Citing Cases

Siracusa v. Sager

The CPA's affidavit that he met with Audrey Sager, Esq. and Jeffrey Horn, Esq. to discuss the plaintiff's…