Continuous Representation Tolls Statute Of Limitations

The New York Appellate Division for the First Judicial Department reinstated a legal malpractice case. The ongoing representation by the lawyers in the underlying case tolled the statute of limitations:

“The complaint here went beyond mere allegations that defendantscontinuously represented plaintiffs in a general professionalrelationship after the specific act of malpractice occurred (cf. Zaref v Berk & Michaels,192 AD2d 346, 348 [1993]), specifically alleging the continued advicethey received from defendants regarding rent regulation, as a result ofwhich they failed to take appropriate steps to assure the subjectproperty would be free from rent regulation. As a result, plaintiffsstated a cause of action that was not barred by the statute oflimitations (see Greene, 56 NY2d at 95).” (MIke Frisch)