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.
The California Court of Appeal, 1st District, reversed a $30 million damages award in this attorney malpractice action.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 ...
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.
At issue is legal malpractice by the defendants.
At issue is legal malpractice by the defendant.
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.
At issue is legal malpractice from from the manner in which the defendants handled litigation on behalf of the plaintiffs.