Case ID: ad3d_127/html/0674-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

David Kassel, Respondent, v James P. Donohue et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
    [6 NYS3d 916]
   Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered August 26, 2013, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants James P. Donohue and Crystal and Donohue’s motion to dismiss the complaint as against them, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint as against James P. Donohue and Crystal and Donohue.

The allegations in the complaint reflect plaintiffs dissatisfaction with defendants’ strategic choices and tactics in the conduct of the arbitration; there is no showing that those choices and tactics were unreasonable (see Rosner v Paley, 65 NY2d 736, 738 [1985]; Pouncy v Solotaroff, 100 AD3d 410 [1st Dept 2012], lv denied 21 NY3d 857 [2013]; Dweck Law Firm v Mann, 283 AD2d 292 [1st Dept 2001]).

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Saxe, DeGrasse and Richter, JJ.