Opinion
2012-12-13
Arianit SIMONI, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Paul J. NAPOLI, Esq., et al., Defendants–Appellants.
Ropers Majeski Kohn Bentley, New York (Andrew L. Margulis of counsel), for appellants. The Dauti Law Firm, P.C., New York (Ylber Albert Dauti of counsel), for respondent.
Ropers Majeski Kohn Bentley, New York (Andrew L. Margulis of counsel), for appellants. The Dauti Law Firm, P.C., New York (Ylber Albert Dauti of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Norma Ruiz, J.), entered April 18, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants' motion to stay the instant legal malpractice action pending the resolution of plaintiff's related personal injury action, and granted plaintiff's cross motion for leave to amend the complaint to add further allegations of malpractice against defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The motion court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendants' request for a stay of the legal malpractice action pending resolution of plaintiff's personal injury action ( seeCPLR 2201). The proceedings do not share complete identity of parties, claims and relief sought ( see *871952 Assoc., LLC v. Palmer, 52 A.D.3d 236, 859 N.Y.S.2d 138 [1st Dept. 2008]; Esposit v. Anderson Kill Olick & Oshinsky, P.C., 237 A.D.2d 246, 655 N.Y.S.2d 401 [2d Dept. 1997] ).
The motion court also properly permitted plaintiff to amend the complaint ( see CPLR 3025[b] ). The amended complaint and the documents submitted in support of the cross motion allege facts from which it could reasonably be inferred that defendants' negligence caused plaintiff's loss ( see Garnett v. Fox, Horan & Camerini, LLP, 82 A.D.3d 435, 918 N.Y.S.2d 79 [1st Dept. 2011] ). At this stage of the proceedings, plaintiff does not have to show that he actually sustained damages as a result of defendants' alleged malpractice ( id. at 436, 918 N.Y.S.2d 79).