Legal Malpractice

Judiciary Law 487 Article in the New York Law Journal

By (Andrew Lavoott Bluestone)

We're proud to announce that the New York Law Journal today published an article about Judiciary Law 487.entitled  An Explosion of Developments in Judiciary Law 487

"Legal concepts change by evolution and revolution. Evolution is the most familiar process in legal scholarship. A principle or a statute is analyzed, then re-interpreted in the light of newer or novel events. The basic principles remain in effect. An example of evolutionary change is seen in the process by which intangible computer files have come to be subjected to conversion analysis. Shmueli v. NRT N.Y. Inc., 68 AD3d 479 (2009). Another example is the gradual acceptance of e-mails in contract and communications law.

Revolutionary change is different and sudden. One example is the emergence of Judiciary Law §487 from its centuries long slumber. After a recent decision by the Court of Appeals on this ancient statute, the world of legal malpractice has been stood on its head. What was formerly an ill-known extreme fringe theory of law has burst into prominence and scholarly acceptance. Although the statute is more than 700 years old, it today stands in the mainstream."

Judiciary Law 487 may well be the newest oldest thing in legal malpractice.  Coming, as it does, from medieval England just after the Magna Carta, it is the oldest statute in Anglo-American jurisprudence.   As for continuity, this seems to be the only attorney-specific statute that has survived 100 years, much less 700+

Today, with a boost from the Court of Appeals, the limits of Judiciary Law 487 law are under tremendous expansion, with its outer edges being defined daily.  We'll comment on the expansion in coming articles.

Full post as published by New York Attorney Malpractice Blog on June 08, 2010 (boomark / email).