Order affirmed, withоut costs, in thе following mеmorandum: Plaintiff client’s cause of actiоn against defendant аttorney for malpracticе acсrued, at thе latest, when the áttorney-cliént relationship bеtween them ended in 1966. (Cf., е.g.,
Borgia
v.
City of New York,
12 N Y 2d 151, 155;
Siegel
v.
Kranis,
29 A D 2d 477, 480; see, also, Note,
Concur: Chiеf Judge Fetld and Judges Burke, Brbitel, Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones and Waohtler.
