This case is one of a growing group of cases where insurers contest their duty to defend an insured lawyer after the lawyer is sued for legal malpractice. The plaintiff, Ms. Kurtin, alleged that she was represented by the law firm in negotiating a loan with one of the principals of that firm, Randy Lee. [If true, the allegations of legal malpractice are problematic. Lee was one of the persons getting a benefit from the loan from Kurtin. He could not fairly and adequately represent her in connection with that loan transaction. Lee’s interests and those of Kurtin were directly adverse.
The lawyers gave prompt notice to their legal malpractice insurer, which denied coverage. The insurer argued that the conflict of interest between Lee and Kurtin barred coverage under the legal malpractice policy:
Chicago Legal Malpractice Lawyer Blog

