Opinion
October 5, 1999
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.), entered April 10, 1998, which granted defendants' motions to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The complaint was properly dismissed as against defendant law firm since an attorney's failure to disclose a conflict of interest is not actionable absent allegations that such failure proximately caused actual damages (see, Prince v. Dembitzer, 193 A.D.2d 494, 495). It cannot be inferred from the complaint that plaintiff would have prevailed in the underlying litigation, or saved any expense compensable in malpractice or fraud, had the firm disclosed the alleged conflict (compare, Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskauer Rose L.L.P., 251 A.D.2d 35, 36). Nor does plaintiff's positing of several alternative courses that the firm might have successfully pursued in the underlying litigation allege any other conduct falling below any other standard of the profession (see, Bernstein v. Oppenheim Co., 160 A.D.2d 428, 431). As against the other defendant, who allegedly induced the law firms s withdrawal from the underlying litigation by retaining the firm to do legal work on behalf of its subsidiary, plaintiff's opponent in the underlying litigation, plaintiff's cause of action for tortious interference with contract was properly dismissed on the basis of documentary evidence demonstrating that the firm's representation of the subsidiary predated its representation of plaintiff, and that such prior representation justified defendant's actions in making the firm aware of a possible conflict and demanding its withdrawal from the underlying litigation (see, Foster v. Churchill, 87 N.Y.2d 744, 750-751;Tekni-Plex, Inc. v. Meyner Landis, 89 N.Y.2d 123, 130-131) We have considered plaintiff's other arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — SULLIVAN, J.P., WILLIAMS, WALLACH, LERNER, FRIEDMAN, JJ.