NY Judges Appear to Back DLA Piper in Malpractice Suit

Appellate panel suggests DLA Piper adequately represented Link Motion Inc. in shareholder lawsuit

Mar. 12, 2026 at 8:36pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A panel of New York appellate judges appeared likely to side with DLA Piper LLP in a legal malpractice lawsuit brought against the firm by technology company Link Motion Inc. Link Motion argued that DLA Piper failed to adequately prepare a defense and represent the company in a federal shareholder derivative lawsuit, but the judges suggested DLA Piper 'kept the ball in the air' for Link Motion until the company could 'sort things out' with its representation.

Why it matters

The case highlights the challenges law firms can face in balancing client representation and potential conflicts of interest, as well as the high bar plaintiffs must clear to prove malpractice claims against their former legal counsel.

The details

During oral arguments, New York Supreme Court First Appellate Department Associate Justice Martin Shulman said DLA Piper 'kept the ball in the air' for Link Motion until the technology company could 'sort things out' with its representation, suggesting the judges were unlikely to side with Link Motion's malpractice claims.

  • The oral arguments took place on Thursday, March 12, 2026.

The players

DLA Piper LLP

A global law firm that was sued for legal malpractice by Link Motion Inc.

Link Motion Inc.

A technology company that brought a legal malpractice lawsuit against DLA Piper LLP, alleging the firm failed to adequately represent it in a federal shareholder derivative lawsuit.

Martin Shulman

A New York Supreme Court First Appellate Department Associate Justice who suggested during oral arguments that DLA Piper adequately represented Link Motion.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“You can't say they did nothing.”

— Martin Shulman, New York Supreme Court First Appellate Department Associate Justice (Bloomberg Law)

What’s next

The appellate panel is expected to issue a ruling on the case in the coming weeks.

The takeaway

This case highlights the high bar plaintiffs must clear to prove legal malpractice claims, as well as the challenges law firms can face in balancing client representation and potential conflicts of interest.