VISSING v. CLARK COUNTY BOARD OF AVIATION COMMISSIONERS, Ind: Court of Appeals 2014 – Google Scholar.
The malpractice lawsuit arose out of an effort to claim, by eminent domain, certain property, which was to be used to an airport. In 2009, the Clark County Aviation Board attempted to purchase land to expand the Clark County Airport.
The alleged error was the failure to object to the landowner’s attempt to file exceptions to an appraiser’s report in the applicable statutory period.
Dillon v. MURPHY & HOURIHANE, LLP, Dist. Court, ND California 2014 – Google Scholar.
The plaintiff brought the legal malpractice action in federal court in San Jose. The defendant law firm moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and, in the alternative, for transfer of the case to Illinois. The district judge denied both motions.
The court explained that the defendant had taken actions in California.
In a recent decision, Bluestein v. Central Wisconsin Anesthesiology, S.C., Nos. 13-3724, 14-1256 and 14-1257, the Seventh Circuit upheld the dismissal of Bluestein’s claim that she was wrongly terminated in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 12101, et seq. and other civil rights statutes.
The problem with the claim was that Bluestein was an owner of the practice and even voted on her own termination. There was and is well-settled law that owners cannot sue under the ADA or other civil rights statutes.
The district court found that “the undisputed facts demonstrated that Bluestein was an employer rather than an employee; … that she did not demonstrate that she was disabled within the meaning of the ADA because she produced no evidence of a substantial limitation in a major life activity; ..”
Matter of Davis 2014 NY Slip Op 07080.
A bankruptcy lawyer was disciplined for allowing a third party to use his electronic login to file bankruptcy petitions. The pertinent part of the opinion states:
“At issue were four involuntary bankruptcy petitions filed between June and December 2011 against debtor Joseph Lipschitz; three of the petitions were filed by purported pro se creditor Manuel Goldsmith and the fourth was filed by Mendel Minko, also a pro se creditor [FN1]. Two of the petitions were filed with the Southern District and the other two were filed with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York. The first petition was withdrawn by the petitioner creditor and the subsequent three were dismissed for failure to [*2]prosecute.[FN2]
If true, this is an ugly awful tale in which a lawyer, Robert M. Stephenson, stole from trusts established by his parents for the benefit of his own children. The key allegations are set forth in the complaint:
“1. In May 2007, Respondent agreed to serve as trustee of the Robert McCreary Stephenson and Martha LaFon Stephenson Annual Exclusion Gifting Trust (“the children’s trust”), which had been created and funded in Florida at that time by Respondent’s parents, Robert McCreary Stephenson and Martha LaFon Stephenson.
This is, unfortunately, an unpublished opinion, In re Marriage of Elizabeth W. Nesbitt and Bruce M. Nesbitt, 2014 IL App (1st) 131825-U.
After the parties divorce reached judgment, Bruce brought a legal malpractice action against his former lawyers for errors he alleged caused him to incur economic damages. Elizabeth then brought a Rule to Show Cause against Bruce on the ground that he had failed to pay her a share of the settlement. She alleged that the legal malpractice claim was marital property.
The court reasoned that Bruce did not discover the cause of action against his lawyers until the judgment of dissolution of marriage was entered. Therefore, the settlement was not marital property and Elizabeth did not have a valid claim to a share of the settlement proceeds.
Last week I gave a presentation on Avoiding Legal Malpractice in Family Law Matters at the Chicago Bar Association Family Law Committee. Thanks to my host, Mallory O’Connor, and Stephanie Capps for help with the presentation.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/241354374/Avoiding-Legal-Malpractice-in-Family-Law-Matters-9-29-2014-EXCJr
Phinisee v. LAYSER, Dist. Court, ED Pennsylvania 2014 – Google Scholar.
One common claim against a lawyer is that he failed to obtain a good enough deal for his client. Here, the lawyers obtained $1.2 million for the plaintiff and her minor child in a lawsuit against the United States. After accepting the settlement, she filed suit for legal malpractice. Plaintiff was apparently unhappy about a Medicaid lien and the amount of the settlement. The district court dismissed the lawsuit on a motion to dismiss. The district court held that the claims were not negligence claims, but, rather claims that the amount of the settlement was insufficient, which are not valid claims under Pennsylvania law.
What the court is saying is that you need more than a bad result to allege legal malpractice. You need to allege some error by the lawyer. Here, plaintiff did not allege an error by the lawyer.
Adkins v. Palermo, Dist. Court, ED Kentucky 2014 – Google Scholar.
Probably the most common way to lose a legal malpractice case is to fail to identify an expert. The defendant moves for summary judgment and the court grants it. This opinion is worth reporting because it is well-written.
In the underlying case, plaintiff, represented by Mr. Palermo, filed a personal injury case. The trial court held that the defendant was immune under workers compensation doctrines. The lawyer told Adkins that there was no valid basis to appeal and concluded the representation. Adkins sued the lawyer, but he failed to obtain an expert witness and, thus, could not prove a breach of the standard of care.
IN RE MARRIAGE OF WIXOM AND WIXOM, Wash: Court of Appeals, 3rd Div. 2014 – Google Scholar.
This is an appeal from a divorce case in which a lawyer (Robert Caruso) and his client (Rick Wixom) were held jointly and severally liable for a $55,000 sanction award. The lawyer and client were sanctioned because, in the underlying custody litigation, they made false charges about Rick’s ex-wife Linda.
Here is where the lawyer made an error. He appealed the sanctions against himself and filed an appeal for his client, Rick Wixom. The court explains how the lawyer threw the client under the bus:
Chicago Legal Malpractice Lawyer Blog