Quantcast
Home (page 10)

Tag Archives: Attorneys

Attorneys – Fiduciary Duty – Question of Law – Breach – Question of Fact – Former Client – Trusts & Estates – Life Insurance (access required)

Spence v. Wingate Although the existence of a fiduciary duty is a question of law for the court, our Court of Appeals was correct that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the defendant-attorney breached his fiduciary duty to his former client. We modify and affirm the Court of Appeals’ decision, which reversed the circuit court’s grant of partial summary judgment for the defendant-attorney.

Read More »

Attorneys – Discipline – Billing – Notary – Trust Account (access required)

In re Nwangaza Respondent failed to keep adequate records when she was billing clients by the hour, she charged for activities not contemplated by her fee agreements, she bounced checks drawn on her trust account because of inadequate recordkeeping, and she signed a client’s name and notarized it without informing the client that she was doing so.

Read More »

Attorneys – Discipline – Simple Assault – Deposition – Slapping Opposing Party (access required)

In re Lovelace When respondent perceived a deponent as being rude, respondent slapped the deponent in the face. Respondent self-reported this incident and later pled no contest to charges of simple assault and battery. We accept the agreement for discipline by consent and definitely suspend respondent from the practice of law for 90 days with the following conditions: (1) respondent shall continue psychiatric and/or psychological treatment, including but not limited to anger management, for one year from the imposition of discipline and (2) he shall submit quarterly reports of his diagnosis, treatment compliance, and prognosis to the Commission on Lawyer Conduct.

Read More »

Attorneys – Discipline – Communications – Clients & Bar (access required)

In re Reeve After respondent closed his law practice, he failed to keep the bar informed of his address, failed to communicate with his former clients or to provide them with records they needed, and failed to keep his financial records. We accept the agreement for discipline by consent and impose a definite suspension of two years. Respondent shall pay the costs incurred by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel and the Commission on Lawyer Conduct in the investigation and prosecution of this matter. Respondent shall not seek reinstatement until he has completed the Ethics School and Trust Account School portions of the Legal Ethics and Practice Program.

Read More »

Insurance – Professional Liability – Accountants – Attorneys — Prior Knowledge – Innocent Insured (access required)

Continental Casualty Co. v. Jones Although the accountant who filled out the application for professional malpractice insurance didn’t know about her partner’s misappropriation of his clients’ funds, her partner’s knowledge of potential claims at the time of the application bars coverage of the misappropriation claims. Summary judgment for the insurer.

Read More »

Civil Practice – Duplicative Lawsuits – First-Filed – Summons Without Complaint – Personal Jurisdiction – Labor & Employment – Attorneys (access required)

Seithel v. Feldman & Pinto, P.A. Even though plaintiff-attorney’s complaint in this action was filed before the defendant-law firm filed its complaint in Pennsylvania, the firm commenced the Pennsylvania action first by filing a summons without a complaint. Since the two lawsuits involve substantially the same parties and causes of action, they are duplicative. The Pennsylvania action has been removed to federal court there. The court grants the firm’s motion to transfer this case to federal court in Pennsylvania. The firm’s motion to dismiss is denied.

Read More »

Attorneys – Discipline – Public Reprimand – Communication & Diligence (access required)

In re Trundy Where respondent failed to communicate with his client, allowed her lawsuit to go to a voluntary nonsuit without prejudice with leave to restore, and did not move to restore the client’s action to the active docket, and where the client’s appellate rights have been extinguished, respondent violated Rules of Professional Conduct 1.3, 1.4, 3.2 and 8.4(a).

Read More »