Plaintiffs then commenced the instant action.

                                                         Discussion

          It is well accepted law in this State that where a claim has been litigated and brought to a final conclusion, subsequent claims that are "coterminous with the transaction or series of transactions from which the earlier claims arose," are barred under the doctrine of res judicata (Couri v. Westchester Country Club, Inc.,186 A.D.2d 715, 716 [₂nd Dept. 1992]; Smith v. Russell Sage College, 54 N.Y.2d 185 [1981]; Boronow v. Boronow 71 N.Y.2d 284 [1988]). A claim will be similarly barred where the cause of action states a separate claim on the same facts, but for different relief or under different legal theory (O’Brien v. City of Syracuse, 54 N.Y.2d 353, 357 (1981); Matter of Reilly v. Reid, 45 N.Y.2d 24 [1978]).
          The gravamen of Plaintiffs’ Complaint involves claims of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, negligence and legal malpractice. Although plaintiffs contend that the instant complaint is not barred by the doctrine of res judicata, the allegations contained within the Complaint, most notably within the first and second causes of action, admittedly arise directly from the settlement of the original malpractice action. Consequently, all of plaintiffs’ claims made in the instant matter have either
Click for Previous Page
Click for Next Page (4/7)
Click for Legal Malpractice Lawsuit