Zorn v. Gilbert
Cases that cite this one
31 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Osborne v. Tulis (2d Cir. 2015)
- RA Global Services, Inc. v. Avicenna Overseas Corp. (District Court, S.D. New York 2011)
- Scantek Medical, Inc. v. Sabella (District Court, S.D. New York 2008)
- Lee v. Leeds, Morelli & Brown, P.C. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2024)
- Lavelle-Tomko v. Aswad & Ingraham (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- CARBONE, ALISON M. v. BRENIZER, JON W. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- Farage v. Ehrenberg (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Deloitte & Touche, LLP (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
- 99th Ave. Holdings, LLC v. Schatz (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2025)
- Colucci v. Rzepka (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- Braten v. Kaplan (2d Cir. 2018)
- Webster v. Sherman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
- Beroza v. Sallah Law Firm, P.C. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Tantleff v. Kestenbaum & Mark (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Louzoun v. Kroll Moss & Kroll, LLP (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Louzoun v. Kroll Moss & Kroll, LLP (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- DISCHIAVI, GARY M. v. CALLI, JR., WILLIAM S. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Singh v. Edelstein (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Singh v. Edelstein (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Aseel v. Jonathan E. Kroll & Associates, PLLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Dischiavi v. Calli (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Dischiavi v. Calli (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Rodeo Family Enterprises, LLC v. Matte (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Rodeo Family Enterprises, LLC v. Matte (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Krichmar v. Scher (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be modified, without costs, by reinstating the legal malpractice cause of action and remitting to Supreme Court for consideration of issues raised by defendants on the motion to dismiss but not reached by that court and, as so modified, affirmed.
Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint alleging, in part, that plaintiffs legal malpractice cause of action was barred by the statute of limitations. An action to recover damages arising *934 from legal malpractice must be commenced within three years after accrual (see CPLR 214 [6]; 203 [a]). “The continuous representation doctrine tolls the statute of limitations . . . where there is a mutual understanding of the need for further representation on the specific subject matter underlying the malpractice claim” (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 306 [2002]; see also Shumsky v Eisenstein, 96 NY2d 164, 167-168 [2001]). Plaintiffs cause of action accrued, at the latest, on December 4, 1997, when a judgment of divorce was entered in the underlying action (see McCoy, 99 NY2d at 305). Defendants’ representation of plaintiff in the underlying action ended, at the earliest, in June 1998. Inasmuch as this action was commenced in May 2001, the Appellate Division erred in holding that plaintiff’s cause of action alleging legal malpractice was time-barred (see McCoy, 99 NY2d at 305; Shumsky, 96 NY2d at 167-168). Issues regarding plaintiffs other causes of action, decided by the courts below, are not raised before us.
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order modified, without costs, by reinstating the legal malpractice cause of action and remitting to Supreme Court, Westchester County, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.