Case Name: Robert S. Cohen et al., Appellants, v. Law Offices of Leonard & Robert Shapiro et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2005-05-03
Citations: 18 A.D.3d 219
Docket Number: 
Parties: Robert S. Cohen et al., Appellants, v Law Offices of Leonard & Robert Shapiro et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 18
Pages: 219–220

Head Matter:
Robert S. Cohen et al., Appellants, v Law Offices of Leonard & Robert Shapiro et al., Respondents.
[793 NYS2d 764]

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R Kapnick, J.), entered March 19, 2004, which denied plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and granted defendants' cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Plaintiffs failed to establish that but for counsel's alleged malpractice, they would have prevailed on appeal and would not have incurred damages upon remand to the federal District Court. Where legal malpractice is alleged, the "failure to establish proximate cause requires dismissal regardless of whether negligence is established" (Russo v Feder.; Kaszovitz, Isaacson, Weber, Skala & Bass, 301 AD2d 63, 67 [2002]). Plaintiffs also failed to establish a chronic or extreme pattern of legal delinquency that would warrant civil relief and the imposition of treble damages pursuant to Judiciary Law § 487 (Markard v Bloom, 4 AD3d 128 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 706 [2004]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Ellerin, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.