SILVA v. WORBY

The conflicting deposition testimony and affidavits submitted by the parties present a material issue of fact whether plaintiff instructed defendants to attempt to settle the case underlying this legal malpractice action for $1.25 million ( see Langhorn v K. Solo Serv. Corp., 302 AD2d 307). As the record indicates that defense counsel in the underlying case was authorized and prepared to settle that case for the requested amount, a finding that plaintiff so instructed defendants would show a settlement opportunity lost through their malpractice ( see Masterson v Clark, 243 AD2d 411).