Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

FRANKEL v. McDONOUGH, 11-4999-cv. (2012)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Number: infco20120612111 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 12, 2012
Latest Update: Jun. 12, 2012
Summary: SUMMARY ORDER UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff-appellant Sofia Frankel appeals from the district court's October 25, 2011, judgment dismissing her complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court entered judgment pursuant to its memorandum and order dated October 24, 2011, granting the motion of defendants-appellees Brian F. McDonough and Drinker Biddle & Reat
More

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Plaintiff-appellant Sofia Frankel appeals from the district court's October 25, 2011, judgment dismissing her complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court entered judgment pursuant to its memorandum and order dated October 24, 2011, granting the motion of defendants-appellees Brian F. McDonough and Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP ("Drinker Biddle") to dismiss Frankel's complaint for legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty and denying Frankel leave to replead.

We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

We review dismissal of a complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) de novo, "accepting all factual allegations as true and drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff." ECA & Local 134 IBEW Joint Pension Trust of Chicago v. JP Morgan Chase Co., 553 F.3d 187, 196 (2d Cir. 2009). We review denial of leave to amend a complaint for abuse of discretion. Hutchinson v. Deutsche Bank Sec. Inc., 647 F.3d 479, 490 (2d Cir. 2011).

We have conducted an independent review of the record in light of these principles. For substantially the reasons stated by the district court in its thorough and well-reasoned decision, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed the complaint and that it did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to replead.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer