AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

ARTHUR BEST, ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. LAW FIRM OF QUELLER AND FISHER, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In a prior proceeding, the Supreme Court found that the defendants in this action, who were the attorneys for the plaintiffs in that proceeding, were entitled to their agreed-upon legal fee. Inasmuch as that determination necessarily decided that there was no malpractice, the plaintiffs are precluded from asserting a cause of action alleging malpractice (see, Kagan Meat Poultry v. Kalter, 70 A.D.2d 632).

Moreover, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the causes of action alleging fraud and breach of contract and for indemnification, since these arise from the same facts as the malpractice cause of action, and thus are duplicative of that cause of action (see, Mecca v. Shang, 258 A.D.2d 569).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BEST v. LAW FIRM OF QUELLER AND FISHER
(Dec 27, 2000)