This case alleges malpractice. It is unusual because the defendants moved for a stay of the case. A stay stops the proceedings dead in their tracks. The defendants filed this motion because the alleged malpractice arose out of estate planning and the plaintiff was a party to other lawsuits (with family members and other heirs) involving that estate planning. The Court held that it had appellate jurisdiction over the motion for a stay of proceedings.
The Appellate Court held that the trial court properly denied the motion for stay of proceedings.