Published on:

Filed March 31.

This is one of several recent cases where a lawyer has made statements questioning the integrity or honesty of judges and has been disciplined. Here the Review Board upheld a recommendation of a six-month suspension for Brian Sides. Here, the lawyer was attempting to vacate a small claims judgment against him and he accused the judge, who ruled against him, of a lack of integrity and honesty. Later, he accused other judges of misconduct.

Statements such as the ones made in this case almost always result in discipline. To defeat the professional claim, the lawyer would have to prove all the statements were factually true, which, of course, he cannot do. It is always permissible to question the reasoning of an opinion. It is improper to question the integrity of the judge or other lawyer.

Published on:

Filed March 6.

This is an unusual proceeding. A lawyer, John Argoudelis, was retained to represent a client. The client, Paul Volgar, informed him that he was the sole heir of James Volgar. Later, the lawyer filed an Affidavit of Heirship which listed one heir. The attorney was disciplined because, soon after filing the affidavit, he became aware that James Volgar had several other heirs, but he failed to correct the affidavit.

The opinion explains:

Published on:

The case is captioned Donald W. Forhman, and Associates, Ltd., v. Marc D. Alberts, P.C., 2013 IL App (1st) 123351, decided March 14, 2014 by the Illinois Appellate Court, Sixth Division.

This is a dispute between two law firms over referral fees. A referral fee is a fee paid by the lawyer who obtains a referral. The lawyer making the referral collects the referral fee. This is the third referral fee dispute I have seen in the Illinois reports this year. The increase in referral fee disputes may be due to the tough economic times in the legal profession. That may, in turn, cause lawyers to fight with each other over fees.

The Facts:

Published on:

Harris v. Vitale, Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 2nd Div. 2014 – Google Scholar.

This case was brought by Robert Harris, the Public Guardian of Cook County. Harris was appointed the plenary guardian of the person for Andrea Molloy, a disabled person. The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, has affirmed a decision dismissing a legal malpractice case against a lawyer, who became involved in the guardianship case.

Molloy had dementia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In February 2009, Harris filed a petition to be appointed temporary guardian of Ms. Molloy and a petition for the appointment of a guardian for a disabled person.

Published on:

Powell v. POTTERFIELD, SC: Court of Appeals 2014 – Google Scholar.

This is an unpublished opinion, which is unfortunate, because it deals with a key issue in divorce malpractice cases – could one of the parties have shown that he or she was entitled to maintenance? This issue can be difficult to demonstrate in a legal malpractice context.

Here the court agreed that wife could have obtained maintenance had the lawyers been diligent in asking for it.  Thus, summary judgment in favor of the law firm was reversed.

Published on:

EVANSTON INSURANCE COMPANY v. RISEBOROUGH, Ill: Supreme Court 2014 – Google Scholar.

The Illinois Statute of Repose bars claims against a lawyer arising out of actions that occurred more than six years before the case was filed. In this case, an insurance company (Evanston) sued two lawyers and alleged that the lawyer defendants wrongfully entered into a settlement agreement on behalf of Evanston’s insured.

The lawyer defendants moved to dismissed based upon the Statute of Repose. (735 ILCS 5/13-214.3 (West 2008). The trial court granted the motion, but the Illinois Appellate Court reversed. It held that the statute of repose did not apply because Evanston was not a client of the lawyer defendants.

Published on:

Huang v. Brenson, Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist. 2014 – Google Scholar.

This opinion affirmed the dismissal of a legal malpractice action filed against a lawyer who defended a legal malpractice case.  This case is unusual because there are two underlying cases, an immigration matter and the legal malpractice case arising out of the immigration matter.

Plaintiff John Huang is an immigration lawyer. The defendant was Ian Brenson, who defended Huang in a legal malpractice action.

Published on:

Former Top Leaders of Dewey & LeBoeuf Are Indicted – NYTimes.com.

The New York Times is reporting that the former leaders of Dewey Ballantine have been indicted for deceiving banks and other investors with false accounting information. This is a sad end for a once great law firm. For those who were partners of the firm (or shareholders) the firm’s demise has caused significant litigation and grief.

 

Published on:

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION v. UNNAMED ATTORNEY, No. 2012–SC–000388–KB., December 19, 2013 – KY Supreme Court | FindLaw.

The Supreme Court of Kentucky has issued a private reprimand to an “Unnamed Attorney” as a result of that attorney’s conduct in settling a case. Specifically, the Kentucky Supreme Court found that Unnamed Attorney was retained to represent another attorney in a disciplinary matter. Unnamed Attorney negotiated a settlement of the dispute between his attorney client and the complaining witness, referred to as Jane Doe. The terms of the settlement included a payment of $30,000 to Jane Doe. Additonally, Unnamed Attorney inserted the following provision in the settlement agreement:

Specifically, paragraph 4 of the settlement agreement stated:

Published on:

Davis v. Fenton, Dist. Court, ND Illinois 2014 – Google Scholar.

Chief Judge Castillo has stayed an unusual legal malpractice case pending the outcome of arbitration. The case is highly unusual because it was filed by Kelli Dudley a lawyer who defends against foreclosures.  In this case her client alleges that her former foreclosure defense attorney, Ernest Fenton, engaged in violations of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 3601 and the Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1982, as well as common law legal malpractice.

The district court followed well-settled law in enforcing an arbitration clause in the engagement letter and staying the case in favor of arbitration, pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act. The district court also rejected claims that the Defendant had waived the arbitration clause.

Contact Information