Skip to main content

Citations

  • 46 A.D.3d 780
  • 848 N.Y.S.2d 304

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • stating that expert testimony not required because attorney’s disregard of “clearly defined and firmly established” rule set forth in New York Worker’s Compensation law “fell below any permissible standard of due care”
  • “Expert testimony is normally needed ... unless the ordinary experience of the fact-finder provides sufficient basis for judging the adequacy of the professional service, or the attorney’s conduct falls below any standard of due care.” (citation and emphasis omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.