Malpractice Claims Barred by Collateral Estoppel Based on Earlier Action Against Co-Counsel

On January 11, 2018, the First Department issued a decision in Guidance Endodontics, LLC v. Olshan Grundman, Frome Rosensweig & Wolosky, LLP, 2018 NY Slip Op. 00240, dismissing malpractice claims based on collateral estoppel, explaining:

Plaintiff's claims in this legal malpractice action are barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel. There is an identity of issues necessarily decided in plaintiff's related malpractice action against defendant's co-counsel in New Mexico and decisive of this action, and plaintiff does not dispute that it vigorously contested cocounsel's successful motions for summary judgment dismissing the New Mexico action.

(Internal citations omitted).

Doctrines such as collateral estoppel and res judicata limit a plaintiff's ability to litigate a dispute more than once. Contact Schlam Stone & Dolan partner Erik Groothuis at egroothuis@schlamstone.com if you or a client have questions regarding whether a claim is barred by an earlier action.