 |
legalmalpractice.com
expertise beyond expectation!
call 800.796.0403 |
go to page 1|2
Our Legal Malpractice Experts bring more than their expertise to your case. They bring results!
Profit Sharing Trust of Marprowear v. Lampf Lipkind, 267 N.J. Super 174 630 A.2d 1191 (Law Div., 1993), where the court wrote that our Legal Malpractice Expert’s “opinion is better supported by case law” than the adversary’s expert.
Result: Judgment in excess of half a million dollars. The decision is one of the most widely cited for the lawyer’s fiduciary duty to its clients.
Fiorentino v. Rapoport, 693 A.2d 208 (Pa. Super. 1997) appeal denied, 1997 PA. 2323 (1997), a widely discussed and frequently cited case in Pennsylvania, where a prominent Philadelphia law firm was sued for conflicts of interest causing nearly a million dollars of damages in a complex commercial transaction.
Result: Relying on the testimony of our Legal Malpractice Expert, the Appellate Division reinstated the claims erroneously dismissed by the trial court. The Supreme Court affirmed. The case was remanded for a new trial and was then settled.
Little v. Obermayer Rebman et al, (Superior Court, J. A19032/04) where, based on our Legal Malpractice Expert’s testimony, a jury found another prestigious Philadelphia firm breached its fiduciary duty in a real estate zoning matter.
Result: Judgment, close to half a million dollars.
Olds v. Donnelly, 291 N.J. Super. 222, 677 A.2d 238 (1996) aff’d 150 N.J. 424 (1997), where based on our Legal Malpractice Expert’s testimony, the jury awarded half a million dollars for legal malpractice in a botched underlying medical malpractice case.
Result: In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of New Jersey upheld the jury award and exempted legal malpractice cases from the entire controversy doctrine. The case changed the law in New Jersey.
go to page 1|2
|
 |
