New York Partner Brian Heermance and Associate Chris Keenoy prevailed on their motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint in a legal malpractice action. The complaint alleged malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and prima facie tort. His cause of action stemmed from an underlying lawsuit which arose out of the purchase of a commercial laundry business. Plaintiff’s legal malpractice case was based on the premise the party who our client represented in the underlying action brought a baseless lawsuit against him and failed to discontinue that action even after they allegedly learned that he had never executed a personal guaranty for the purchase of the business and accordingly had no liability.
Brian and Chris established that our client’s involvement in the underlying action had terminated by the time this information had come to light, and despite the fact that the judge had issued orders on 7/12/13 and 9/16/13, for all intents and purposes, the earlier order terminated the underlying proceeding in his favor, and more importantly, started the clock for statute of limitations purposes. Brian and Chris argued that as each of plaintiff’s three causes of actions were intentional torts, each must be governed by a one-year statute of limitations. The court agreed and found that plaintiff’s commencement of this lawsuit on 9/15/14 (within one year of the court’s second order, but outside of one year of the court’s first order) was untimely and dismissed plaintiff’s complaint in its entirety.