115 results for 'cat:"Legal Malpractice"'.
J. Fowlkes dismisses this legal malpractice lawsuit for failure to state a claim and denies the pro se plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend, calling such an effort futile. The malpractice claim allegedly stems from the defendant attorney’s legal representation in an underlying criminal case. However, the plaintiff has failed to show “that he has obtained post-conviction relief,” and his amended complaint also fails to show why the case should not be dismissed.
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: Fowlkes, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv2174, NOS: Mandamus & Other - Habeas Corpus, Categories: Civil Procedure, Evidence, legal Malpractice
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court improperly dismissed a legal malpractice claim. The attorney clearly failed to complete proper service, leading to dismissal. This alone would not be grounds for malpractice, but serves as such since the client managed to get a default judgment against the co-defendant on the same set of facts. Reversed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 02503, Categories: legal Malpractice
J. Sumners finds that the trial court properly dismissed legal malpractice claims brought by the borough of Englewood Cliffs stemming from an affordable housing lawsuit and properly imposed sanctions on the borough. The borough was not immune from sanctions for bringing a lawsuit that had been deemed frivolous, and the borough refused to settle the underlying litigation. Meanwhile, the borough failed to lay a foundation for civil conspiracy claims. Affirmed.
Court: New Jersey Appellate Division, Judge: Sumners , Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: A-2765-21, Categories: Sanctions, legal Malpractice
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Griffith finds that a law firm may have breached the standard of care owed by Delaware attorneys in representing an insurance company in claims contending a new employee breached the non-compete agreement with his prior employer, a competing insurer. The trial court failed to acknowledge the negative effects of the law firm's discovery deficiencies on the summary judgment proceedings in chancery court, which cost the insurer significant damages in fees and costs and a $1.2 million settlement.
Court: Delaware Supreme Court, Judge: Griffiths, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 213, 2023, Categories: Insurance, Settlements, legal Malpractice
J. Jewell finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of the attorney and law firm on claims relating to alleged conflicts of interest during their representation for a failed transaction to merge real estate businesses. The allegations involving conflicts of interest involve negligence only and not fiduciary duty, and there was insufficient evidence to establish causation as to the professional negligence claim. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Jewell, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 14-22-00781-CV, Categories: Fiduciary Duty, legal Malpractice, Contract
J. McClarty finds the lower court properly dismissed a client’s legal malpractice action against her former attorney. The client retained the attorney to represent her in a matter concerning a vehicle accident and subsequent unsatisfactory repairs to her motorhome. The attorney took the clients retainer, but avoided communicating with her and never filed any action on behalf of the client. After the client complained, the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility placed the attorney on diversion pending the completion of a practice and professional enhancement program, and he returned the retainer. The client then filed the instant action arguing legal malpractice, but at hearing she did not present any evidence supporting her claim of negligence against him or deficient performance. Affirmed.
Court: Tennessee Court of Appeals, Judge: McClarty, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: E2023-00930-COA-R3-CV, Categories: Damages, Negligence, legal Malpractice
J. Pitman finds that the district court properly found for a client on his legal malpractice action against his lawyer. In the client's affidavit, he detailed the negligent representation by the lawyer during their attorney-client relationship lasting from 1991 until 2017. Further, the lawyer admitted to the acts of legal malpractice and the losses caused by it. However, the damages awarded should be vacated because the amount owed to the client cannot be determined from the supporting documents to the motion for summary judgment. Affirmed in part.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Pitman, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 55,607-CA, Categories: Evidence, Damages, legal Malpractice
J. Albregts denies both parties’ motions for summary judgment. The purchaser sues for unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, legal malpractice’ and fraud regarding an allegedly fraudulent real estate investment scheme. The seller represented herself as a realtor and was retained by the purchaser to purchase various Nevada properties under his name and to rent out and manage those properties for his benefit. The alleged realtor forged deeds and transferred legal title of the properties to and from entities she controlled, leaving the purchaser with one of 24 properties for which he has not received his investment money back. According to the evidence shown, multiple questions of material fact must be decided at trial.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Albregts, Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv1683, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Fraud, Real Estate, legal Malpractice
J. Cates finds the lower court properly found in favor of an attorney in this matter of legal malpractice and properly denied a property owner’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the evidence. The property owner retained the attorney for guidance related to a proposed real estate development project. The attorney testified that he told the property owner that he did not believe developing the property on his own was a wise business venture, and that he explained the pros and cons of incorporating the project to limit the property owner’s exposure to liability. But the property owner says he was never advised on incorporation or on a pipeline easement that ran through the property, as supported by evidence, that the court should enter a judgment in his favor, and that he should be granted a new trial for damages. The instant court finds that the evidence presented was subject to interpretation, and will not second guess the findings of the jury. Affirmed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Cates, Filed On: April 8, 2024, Case #: 220818, Categories: Real Estate, Negligence, legal Malpractice
J. Christopher finds that the trial court properly denied the law firm's dismissal motion under the Texas Citizens Participation Act in the former client's legal malpractice suit over the alleged failure to protect its lien rights for an electrical substation project. The firm did not show the allegations in the suit involve the exercise of the right to petition, so the TCPA does not apply. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Christopher, Filed On: April 2, 2024, Case #: 14-22-00741-CV, Categories: Anti-slapp, legal Malpractice
Per curiam, the Oklahoma Supreme Court approves the bar's application to approve attorney Christopher Roberts Kelly's resignation. The bar's investigation into the attorney involved complaints of his failure to timely perform legal work after being paid a retainer, as well as his having been suspended from legal practice in another state. Kelly's affidavit of resignation reflects he voluntarily renders his resignation, was not coerced and is aware of the consequences.
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 1, 2024, Case #: SCBD-7628, Categories: Administrative Law, legal Malpractice, Attorney Discipline
J. Cradle finds that the trial court properly dismissed a request to reopen a case after a judgement of nonsuit made by a client in a legal malpractice case against the attorneys who represented her in a divorce. The client did not demonstrate that she was reasonably prevented from filing a response prior to the judgment. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Cradle, Filed On: March 22, 2024, Case #: AC45261, Categories: Civil Procedure, legal Malpractice
J. DuBow finds that the lower court improperly sustained the preliminary objections filed by a lawyer in this legal malpractice suit alleging breach of contract filed by a past client, who filed pro se. The court cannot recharacterize the litigant’s contract claim as a tort claim and then dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the statute of limitations ran out. Reversed.
Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court, Judge: DuBow, Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: J-A21027-23, Categories: Jurisdiction, legal Malpractice, Contract
J. Halligan finds that the appellate division properly held that an attorney established entitlement to fees in a medical malpractice action as he calculated them. His client claimed legal malpractice and sought plenary action under judiciary law for alleged deceit on the court, which she was permitted to bring as opposed to solely seeking vacatur on appeal. However, she failed to raise triable issues on whether the attorney's calculations amounted to false statements. Affirmed.
Court: New York Court Of Appeals, Judge: Halligan, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: 18, Categories: legal Malpractice, Attorney Fees
J. Kocoras denies the sued lawyer and law firm’s motion to compel the production of documents from the suing real estate investor. The investor is suing the lawyer and law firm for malpractice, stemming from poor legal advice the lawyer gave the investor while he was looking to sign a property guaranty loan potentially worth $47 million. The loan defaulted, and while the investor blames the lawyer for his $4 million liability, the lawyer places blame on yet another attorney who counseled the investor. The lawyer seeks communications between the investor and that attorney, but the court concludes these communications are privileged.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Kocoras, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv1302, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Real Estate, Discovery, legal Malpractice
J. Kobayashi dismisses a complaint by a formerly jailed man against public defenders who he says did not verify his identity when he was wrongfully arrested and detained for several years on a warrant issued for a different name. The public defenders have 11th Amendment immunity. Additionally, the decision to call for a competency evaluation on the man, rather than investigate his claims of mistaken identity, was not an act of disability discrimination or legal malpractice because the man could not show the public defenders were motivated by malice. The decision is protected by conditional privilege and counts as an exercise of government discretion, as making that decision would have required the public defenders to also question the police and correctional facilities’ records.
Court: USDC Hawaii, Judge: Kobayashi, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv456, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Ada / Rehabilitation Act, legal Malpractice
J. Johnson, in this interlocutory appeal, finds the trial court improperly denied the New York law firm's motion for special appearance. The father filed his legal malpractice suit against the firm for its representation in a suit regarding the wrongful death of his son from consuming a particular herbal extract, a circumstance for which the firm professed expertise. The father failed to negate the firm’s challenge to his jurisdictional allegations. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 09-23-00201-CV, Categories: Jurisdiction, Wrongful Death, legal Malpractice
J. Suarez finds the lower court properly granted the law firm's motion for summary judgment on legal malpractice claims brought by the former client. Her failure to obtain an expert witness to save money was deliberate conduct that violated the rules of discovery, while her claims of trauma from being forced to relive memories of her marriage did not amount to excusable neglect. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Suarez, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: AC45952, Categories: Civil Procedure, Experts, legal Malpractice
J. Hyman finds that the lower court improperly found the crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege applicable to alleged defamatory conduct by attorneys in this suit where a law firm published the results of its investigation into its client's financial governance, finding that its former pastor had misappropriated church resources to fund an extravagant lifestyle. The pastor presented no evidence showing the church sought advice from its attorneys with the intent to defame him, and extending the crime-fraud exception to this kind of claim would risk deterring clients from seeking legal advice. Reversed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Hyman, Filed On: March 1, 2024, Case #: 230089, Categories: Fraud, Privilege, legal Malpractice
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly found for the law firm in this legal malpractice action. The client's claim expired under the applicable statute of limitations in April 2018, but did not file suit until September 2019. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: 00978, Categories: legal Malpractice
J. Markle finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of the attorney in a legal malpractice and breach of contract action brought by the trustee after her fraud lawsuit against an insurance company was dismissed in federal court. The trustee did not have an individual attorney-client relationship with the attorney because the attorney represented the trust. The trial court correctly found that the attorney was entitled to judgmental immunity for his decisions in the underlying action to proceed under Georgia rather than New York law and to seek reformation of the insurance contract instead of rescission. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Markle, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: A23A1733, Categories: legal Malpractice
J. Kapnick finds that the lower court improperly found for the law firm in a legal malpractice suit. The reinsurer has standing to asset a legal malpractice claim against the lawyers representing the insured in an underlying personal injury action under the theory of equitable subrogation. The reinsurer has sufficiently shown the alleged malpractice was the cause of the loss it suffered in having to pay $2.8 million towards the settlement in the underlying action. Reversed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Kapnick, Filed On: February 15, 2024, Case #: 00799, Categories: Insurance, legal Malpractice
J. Carlyle finds that the lower court properly granted summary judgment for the defendant law firm in this suit brought by a liquidating trustee alleging breach of fiduciary duty, legal malpractice, fraudulent transfer and participatory liability, based on the firm's involvement in a recapitalization plan. Summary judgment was appropriate "based on the absence of standing" regarding certain "allegedly assigned causes of action." Also, the firm negated an essential element of the breach of fiduciary duty claim, specifically as to an alleged improper benefit. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Carlyle, Filed On: February 13, 2024, Case #: 05-23-00264-CV, Categories: Fraud, Fiduciary Duty, legal Malpractice
J. McEvers grants a motion to dismiss an appeal after a husband and wife prevailed on the causation element of their legal malpractice action
against a law firm. The couple alleged that the firm was negligent in representing them in a quiet title action against the State of North Dakota.
Court: North Dakota Supreme Court, Judge: McEvers, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 2024ND15, Categories: Property, legal Malpractice