DIRITO v. STANLEY

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed plaintiffs' demand for damages for "emotional and mental pain [and] suffering" in this legal malpractice action. We reject plaintiffs' argument that such damages are recoverable in a legal malpractice action, whether based on the negligence or breach of contract causes of action asserted in the complaint (see, Green v Leibowitz, 118 A.D.2d 756, 757-758; see also, Jensen v Whitford Co., 167 A.D.2d 826; Lancellotti v Howard, 155 A.D.2d 588, 589-590; Fowler v Town of Ticonderoga, 131 A.D.2d 919, 921).

Plaintiffs have abandoned their appeal from that part of the order dismissing their demand for punitive damages by failing to brief that issue (see, Agee v Ajar, 154 A.D.2d 569, 571-572, appeal dismissed 75 N.Y.2d 916).