In Mid City Elec. Corp. v Peckar & Abramson, 214 AD3d 646, 648 [2d Dept 2023], the court dealt with the issue as to a plaintiff having to prove an attorney-client relationship, holding:
To recover damages for legal malpractice, a plaintiff must prove, inter alia, the existence of an attorney-client relationship (see Siemsen v Mevorach, 160 AD3d 1004, 1005 [2018]; Volpe v Canfield, 237 AD2d 282, 283 [1997]). “It is well established that, with respect to attorney malpractice, absent fraud, collusion, malicious acts, or other special circumstances, an attorney is not liable to third parties, not in privity, for harm caused by professional negligence” (Rovello v Klein, 304 AD2d 638, 638 [2003]). “The unilateral belief of a plaintiff alone does not confer upon him or her the status of a client” (Lombardi v Lombardi, 127 AD3d 1038, 1042 [2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]).
Richard A. Klass, Esq.
Your Court Street Lawyer
#CourtStreetLawyer #litigation #attorney-client #legalmalpractice
Richard A. Klass, Esq., maintains a law firm engaged in civil litigation at 16 Court Street, 28th Floor, Brooklyn, New York. He may be reached at (718) COURT●ST or RichKlass@courtstreetlaw.com with any questions.
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
© 2023 Richard A. Klass
