Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the third cause of action alleging a violation of Judiciary Law § 487. The defendant demonstrated her entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by establishing that there was no evidence of her intent "to deceive, or a chronic, extreme pattern of legal delinquency that proximately caused the [plaintiffs'] alleged damages" ( O'Connell v. Kerson, 291 AD2d 386, 387; see O'Connor v. Dime Sav. Bank of N.Y., 265 AD2d 313; Ulrich v. Hausfeld, 269 AD2d 526). In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact that they sustained any damage proximately caused either by the defendant's alleged deceit or by an alleged chronic, extreme pattern of legal delinquency by the defendant ( see O'Connell v. Kerson, supra at 387; O'Connor v. Dime Sav. Bank of N.Y., supra at 314; Manna v. Ades, 237 AD2d 264, 265; Di Prima v. Di Prima, 111 AD2d 901, 902).