In Overseas Shipholding Group, Inc. v. Proskauer Rose, LLP, et al., 2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 05772 (1st Dep’t, July 2, 2015), the Appellate Division denied a motion to dismiss a legal malpractice claim arising out of tax advice provided in connection with a restructuring and credit facility agreement, and found that the claim was adequately pleaded and should proceed to trial. The court rejected arguments that the action was time-barred, since the plaintiff claimed that the allegedly deficient advice, while beginning in 2005, continued through the course of an ongoing representation and that it continually relied on the defendants’ advice. It also rejected a claim that a 2006 credit facility agreement drafted by a different law firm severed any causal connection between the work done in 2005 and plaintiff’s increased tax liability, noting that issues of causation are for the trier of fact and not to be resolved on a motion to dismiss.