U.S. Appellate Court Affirms Witness’s Exclusion—Cites New Rule 702 but Follows Abrogated Precedent Instead
The district court in this case excluded the testimony of the plaintiffs’ medical expert witness in this medical malpractice case, citing Rule 702, resulting in a summary judgment against the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs appealed, but the circuit court affirmed the district court, citing Rule 702 in affirming the exclusion of the plaintiffs’ witness. Even though the 2023 amended Rule 702 was cited, the circuit court reverted back to the pre-amended Rule 702 to bolster its exclusion of the witness.
Rodriguez v. Hosp. San Cristobal, Inc.
The district court in this case excluded the testimony of the plaintiffs’ medical expert witness in this medical malpractice case, citing Rule 702, resulting in a summary judgment against the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs appealed, but the circuit court affirmed the district court, citing Rule 702 in affirming the exclusion of the plaintiffs’ witness. Even though the 2023 amended Rule 702 was cited, the circuit court reverted back to the pre-amended Rule 702 to bolster its exclusion of the witness.
Recap of the New Jersey CPA Society FVS Conference
Some excellent speakers covered litigation tips, malpractice, estate tax audits, statistics for lost profits, cryptocurrency, and divorce matters at the Forensic and Valuation Services Conference hosted by the New Jersey Society of Certified Public Accountants (NJCPA ...
Furrer v. Siegel & Rouhana, LLC
A name attorney in a Maryland law firm withdrew after having his license suspended. He sued the firm for compensation for his 26.5% interest in the firm. The firm countersued for damages related to his mistreatment of client accounts. The trial court determined a value of his interest and also determined damages that the attorney owed the firm for his mistreatment of client accounts. The appellate court affirmed the damages but remanded the valuation of the 26.5% interest.
Maryland Appellate Court Remands for Valuation of Withdrawing Member’s Interest in Law Firm and Affirms Damages Award
A name attorney in a Maryland law firm withdrew after having his license suspended. He sued the firm for compensation for his 26.5% interest in the firm. The firm countersued for damages related to his mistreatment of client accounts. The trial court determined a value of his interest and also determined damages that the attorney owed the firm for his mistreatment of client accounts. The appellate court affirmed the damages but remanded the valuation of the 26.5% interest.
Estate attorney sued over alleged undervaluation
The matriarch of a family business in Hawaii had four children, two of which were involved in the business.
Sullivan v. Loden
In this malpractice case against an estate attorney, the attorney was denied a summary judgment. The primary issue related to the attorney’s valuation of stock of a family business that was gifted to two of the four children of the decedent. While an “equalization payment” was made to each of the two remaining children, one of these two sued the attorney for both breach of fiduciary duty and for undervaluing the stock gifted, resulting in an underpaid equalization payment.
Estate Attorney Is Denied a Summary Judgment for Alleged Incorrect Valuation of Gifts of Stock—Malpractice Case Proceeds
In this malpractice case against an estate attorney, the attorney was denied a summary judgment. The primary issue related to the attorney’s valuation of stock of a family business that was gifted to two of the four children of the decedent. While an “equalization payment” was made to each of the two remaining children, one of these two sued the attorney for both breach of fiduciary duty and for undervaluing the stock gifted, resulting in an underpaid equalization payment.
Physician Compensation and COVID-19: Then and Now and Now What?
PYA’s Kathryn Taylor, CPA/ABV, ASA, MBA (consulting senior manager), and Justin Conant (consulting senior staff) will be presenting Physician Compensation and COVID-19: Then and Now and Now What. In this 100-minute session, Kathryn and Justin will review what physician compensation was like before COVID-19 and how it changed during the pandemic. Next, we will look into the future and explain where physician compensation and physician arrangements are headed. Kathryn and Justin will go through topics ...
Trial court leans on peer review service for Daubert determination
When, in a Mississippi accounting malpractice case, the trial court used an outside "technical advisor" to determine the admissibility of the parties’ proposed expert testimony, the Daubert hearing assumed a whole other dimension. It was no longer simply a battle between the opposing experts, but an occasion for outside experts to judge the work of the parties’ experts.
Attorney Malpractice Resulted in $30 Million Lost Profits Award
The California Court of Appeal, 1st District, reversed a $30 million damages award in this attorney malpractice action.
Kairos Scientific Inc. v. Fish & Richardson, P.C.
The California Court of Appeal, 1st District, reversed a $30 million damages award in this attorney malpractice action.
Combining valuation methods is not erroneous
In determining whether a legal malpractice claim involving a marital dissolution action would have succeeded on appeal, the district court had ruled that the trial court’s valuation of husband’s business was not erroneous, and husband appealed.
Richards v. Knuchel
In determining whether a legal malpractice claim involving a marital dissolution action would have succeeded on appeal, the district court had ruled that the trial court's valuation of husband's business was not erroneous, and husband appealed.
Hatfield v. VanEpps
Law firm uses appraiser to value surgical practice but was already involved in another divorce case with the firm, a case involving another member of the practice.
Strong v. Vestevich
Appellant agreed on record and under oath to voluntarily waive the opportunity for discovery and accept husband's valuation of his GM dealership at trial.
Thomas F. Brady, et al. v. Daniel B Miller, M.D., et al.
The Ohio Court of Appeals, 2nd District, reversed a trial court’s decision to grant a remittitur with regard to the lost wages award in this medical malpractice case because the remittitur was granted without the plaintiff's consent.
AVOIDING MALPRACTICE TRAPS IN NONCASH CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS
n AVOIDING MALPRACTICE TRAPS IN NONCASH CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS , Lipman, Francine J., and Williamson, James E. The Practical Tax Lawyer , Winter 2000 This article examines the hazards o ...
Wood v. McGrath, North, Mullin & Kratz
At issue is legal malpractice by the appellee for by failing to inform the appellant that the law relating to two issues relevant to a divorce settlement was unsettled and that the settlemen resolved those issue against her.
Williams v. Ely
At issue is legal malpractice by the defendants.
Hudson v. Windholz
At issue is legal malpractice by the defendant.
Davis v. Damrell
At issue is legal practice. The appellant contends that the issue of negligence concerning the implications of an unsettled proposition of law presented triable questions of fact.
Woodruff v. Tomlin
At issue is legal malpractice from from the manner in which the defendants handled litigation on behalf of the plaintiffs.