You are here: / / THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE SETTLEMENT PROCEEDING UTTERLY REFUTED PLAINTIFF’S...
, ,

THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE SETTLEMENT PROCEEDING UTTERLY REFUTED PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM TO HAVE BEEN COERCED INTO SETTLING, THE LEGAL MALPRACTICE COMPLAINT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISMISSED (SECOND DEPT),

The Second Department, reversing Supreme Court, determined that defendants-attorneys’ motion to dismiss the complaint in this legal malpractice action should have been granted because the transcript of the settlement proceeding utterly refuted the allegations in the complaint. Plaintiff alleged it was coerced into settling the action:

A motion to dismiss a complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) “may be appropriately granted only where the documentary evidence utterly refutes plaintiff’s factual allegations, conclusively establishing a defense as a matter of law” … . …

A legal malpractice cause of action “is viable, despite settlement of the underlying action, if it is alleged that settlement of the action was effectively compelled by the mistakes of counsel” … .

In support of their motion, the defendants submitted the transcript of the court proceeding setting forth the terms of the settlement of the underlying action, which conclusively established that the plaintiff was not coerced into settling … . The plaintiff’s allegations that it was coerced into settling the underlying action were utterly refuted by the admissions of its principals during the settlement proceeding that they had discussed the terms of the settlement with their attorneys, understood the settlement terms, and had no questions about them; that they were entering into the settlement freely, of their own volition, and without undue influence or coercion; and that they were satisfied with their legal representation … . Glenwayne Dev. Corp v James J. Corbett, P.C., 2019 NY Slip Op 06069, Second Dept 8-7-19

 

You might also like
Arbitration Award Based Upon Collective Bargaining Agreement Does Not Have a Preclusive Effect Upon a Subsequent Employment Discrimination Action Based on the Same Facts
The Existence of Probable Cause Required Dismissal of Causes of Action for False Arrest, False Imprisonment, Malicious Prosecution and Violation of Civil Rights (42 USC 1983)
US BANK AS THE CURRENT ASSIGNEE OF THE MORTGAGE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO INTERVENE IN THIS ACTION TO DISCHARGE AND CANCEL THE MORTGAGE (SECOND DEPT).
GOLFER ASSUMED THE RISK OF SLIPPING ON A WET RAILROAD TIE WHICH LINED A PATH ON THE GOLF COURSE.
Although Defendant Was Not Responsible for the Pedestrian Ramp, There Was a Question of Fact Whether Defendant’s Snow Removal (from the Ramp) Created the Dangerous Condition
QUESTIONS OF FACT WHETHER PAYMENT WAS PURSUANT TO AN ORAL CONTRACT, THEREBY TAKING THE CONTRACT OUT OF THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS (SECOND DEPT).
FORECLOSURE ACTION ABANDONED, BANK FAILED TO INITIATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT PROCEEDINGS WITHIN ONE YEAR (SECOND DEPT).
Criteria for Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Cause of Action (Where Documentary Evidence Submitted) Explained—Criteria for Motion to Dismiss Based on Documentary Evidence Explained—Pleading Requirements for Legal Malpractice Explained

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2025 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

ALTHOUGH THE BETTER PRACTICE IS TO SUBMIT A SEPARATE AFFIRMATION, DEFENSE COUNSEL’S... WHERE ARBITRABLE AND NONARBITRABLE CLAIMS ARE INTERTWINED, COURT PROCEEDINGS...