Skip to Content

Overview

Partner Jason M. Myers concentrates his defense practice in professional liability.

Mr. Myers defends a wide range of professionals in accusations of negligence and misconduct including lawyers, accountants, auditors, brokers, architects, engineers, property owners, and real estate professionals. He defends errors and omissions claims arising from the performance of professional duties, and allegations of breach of duty to protect our clients’ licenses and careers. 

He defends clients in directors and officers matters, including but not limited to condominium and cooperative boards, unit owners, and shareholders. Mr. Myers also handles a variety of commercial disputes, cybersecurity matters, property owners’ liability matters, and consumer protection claims including violations under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Fair Debt Collections Protections Act (FDCPA).

He creates custom strategies for resolving clients’ legal matters by resolving disputes at the earliest opportunity. Should it be necessary to go through trial, he prepares a vigorous defense to deliver a successful case outcome. Additionally, he has experience representing clients in data privacy and cybersecurity, insurance coverage, and general liability. Mr. Myers is an experienced litigator having resolved client’s cases, including through dozens of trials. 

Prior to joining Kaufman Dolowich, he was a partner handling a range of professional liability, and previously an associate practicing law in insurance liability for a national insurance defense firm.

Admissions

  • New York
  • New Jersey
  • United States Court of Appeals
    • Second Circuit
    • Third Circuit
  • U.S. District Court
    • Eastern District of New York
    • Southern District of New York
    • District of New Jersey
  • Supreme Court of New Jersey

Education

  • Cooley Law School- J.D.
  • University at Albany, State University of New York- B.S., cum laude

Professional Memberships

  • Professional Liability Underwriting Society (PLUS)
  • The Claims and Litigation Management Alliance (CLM)
  • New York State Bar Association (NYSBA)

Representative Matters 

  • Singer v. DeBlasio, et al, 165 N.Y.S.3d 690, modified in part and aff’d in part, 215 A.D.3d 440 (1st Dept. 2023). After oral argument, the Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the tortious interference with contractual relations claim against the defendant lobbyist. Additionally, it modified the decision by overturning the denial and dismissing the claims of tortious interference with prospective business and prima facie tort against the lobbyist defendant. The Appellate Division concluded that the Noerr-Pennington doctrine protected the defendant’s lobbying efforts opposing the development and rezoning of a commercial property in the East Village of New York City.

     

  • Miami Capital, LLC v Hurwitz, 2017 N.Y. Slip Op 31925(U) (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty 2017), aff’d 174 A.D.3d 414 (1st Dept. 2019). Both the Trial Court and the Appellate Division upheld the dismissal of a legal malpractice complaint involving a $1.4 million sale of real property owned by a nonprofit corporation. The nonprofit sought to undo the sale for lacking approval from the State of New York or the Attorney General’s Office. The defendant attorney, representing the buyer, argued that they did not obtain the necessary approvals as per New York’s Not-for-Profit Corporation Law. The Court ruled in favor of the defendant, citing the contract, which placed the responsibility for approvals on the nonprofit, not the buyer. The Appellate Division agreed, noting the defendant attorney’s reliance on the seller’s counsel’s statement that court approval was not needed due to the property not being a substantial asset.

  • Lubin v. Ross, 2019 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 24244 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Nassau Cty, 2019). The Court dismissed 14 claims, including legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty, against the attorney defendants. These claims arose from the plaintiff’s representation in a federal criminal case, where he pleaded guilty and later sued the attorneys, alleging inadequate advice regarding the plea’s consequences. The plaintiff sued his former attorneys and their subsequent firms. However, the Court found that the plaintiff did not allege his innocence or a credible claim of innocence in the underlying case, leading to the dismissal of all 14 claims. 

  • One PPW Owner LLC v. IBI Group, 2023 N.Y. Slip Op 30167(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty 2023). The Court granted a third-party defendant’s motion to dismiss claims for contractual and common law indemnification and breach of insurance obligations in a commercial property dispute. The property owner sued the architect, alleging faulty designs. The architect, in turn, sued all subcontractors, including permit expeditors. The Court dismissed these claims because the architect could not show that any duty for indemnification or insurance obligations existed.

Awards

  • Named to Super Lawyers, New York Metro “Rising Star,” 2016-2022

 

Mansfield Rule Certified 2023 Super Lawyers Super Lawyers Best Law Firms 2023 Best Law Firms 2024 Martindale Hubbel AV Preeminent Law 360