Pfeiffer v. Hoffman
| Decision Date | 11 June 1998 |
| Citation | 674 N.Y.S.2d 32,251 A.D.2d 94 |
| Parties | , 1998 N.Y. Slip Op. 5845 Andor PFEIFFER, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Jeffrey C. HOFFMAN, et al., Defendants-Respondents. Andor PFEIFFER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Milton PICKMAN, et al., Defendants-Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Marshall C. Berger, for Andor Pfeiffer, et al.
Stuart M. Bodoff, for Jeffrey C. Hoffman, et al.
John C. Grosz, for Milton Pickman, et al.
Before LERNER, P.J., and SULLIVAN, NARDELLI, RUBIN and SAXE, JJ.
Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Goodman, J.), entered on or about December 12, 1996 and December 19, 1996, which granted defendants' motion in the first action to dismiss the complaint and granted defendants' motion in the second action to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
A cause of action for legal malpractice arising from negligent representation in a criminal proceeding may not be maintained where, as here, "the determination of [plaintiff's] guilt of [the offense in connection with which he was allegedly negligently represented] remains undisturbed" (Carmel v. Lunney, 70 N.Y.2d 169, 173, 518 N.Y.S.2d 605, 511 N.E.2d 1126; see also, Doyle v. Ruskin, 230 A.D.2d 888, 646 N.Y.S.2d 889, appeal dismissed 90 N.Y.2d 883, 661 N.Y.S.2d 826, 684 N.E.2d 275).
Plaintiff is additionally precluded from maintaining an action for professional malpractice against the accountant defendants in the second action on the ground that, although one of them, Pickman, was retained by plaintiff to testify as an expert in his behalf at his criminal trial, he did not testify to plaintiff's satisfaction. A witness at a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding enjoys an absolute privilege with respect to his or her testimony (Park Knoll Associates v. Schmidt, 59 N.Y.2d 205, 207, 464 N.Y.S.2d 424, 451 N.E.2d 182).
We have considered plaintiffs' remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dakota Cheese, Inc. v. Ford
...primarily deal with negligence actions by the "criminal wrongdoer" against the criminal defense attorney. See Pfeiffer v. Hoffman, 251 A.D.2d 94, 674 N.Y.S.2d 32 (1998); Peeler v. Hughes & Lace, 909 S.W.2d 494 (Tex.1995); Johnson v. Odom, 949 S.W.2d 392 (Tex.App. 1997); Saks v. Sawtelle, Go......
-
Toaspern v. Laduca Law Firm LLP, 524322.
...to his or her testimony," as long as the statements made are material to the issues to be resolved therein ( Pfeiffer v. Hoffman, 251 A.D.2d 94, 95, 674 N.Y.S.2d 32 [1998] ; accord Martinson v. Blau, 292 A.D.2d 234, 235, 738 N.Y.S.2d 572 [2002] ; see Youmans v. Smith, 153 N.Y. 214, 219, 47 ......
-
S.T.M.D. (Diane B.), Matter of
...812, 703 N.E.2d 763 In Matter of S.T.M.D., Jr., Diane B., Salvation Army NO. 991 Court of Appeals of New York October 15, 1998 --- A.D.2d ----, 674 N.Y.S.2d 32. ...