Mid-Hudson Val. Fed. Credit Union v Quartararo & Lois, PLLC (
| Mid-Hudson Val. Fed. Credit Union v Quartararo & Lois, PLLC |
| June 7, 2018 |
| Court of Appeals |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| As corrected through Wednesday, August 15, 2018 |
[*1]
| Mid-Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union, Appellant, v Quartararo & Lois, PLLC, et al., Respondents. |
Decided June 7, 2018
Mid-Hudson Val. Fed. Credit Union v Quartararo & Lois, PLLC,
Luibrand Law Firm, PLLC, Latham (Kevin A. Luibrand of counsel), for appellant.
Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP, Hawthorne (Hillary J. Raimondi of counsel), for respondents.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order insofar as appealed from affirmed, with costs. The Appellate Division properly concluded that plaintiff Mid-Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union did not state a claim for legal malpractice against defendants Paul Quartararo and Quartararo & Lois, PLLC insofar as the amended complaint failed to allege facts "sufficiently particular to give the court and [defendants] notice of the transactions, occurrences, or series of transactions or occurrences, intended to be proved" (CPLR 3013).
Concur: Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Garcia, Wilson and Feinman.