Close

Chicago Legal Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Updated:

Oregon Supreme Court Recognizes That A Law Firm’s Communications To In-House Counsel Are Privileged

CRIMSON TRACE CORPORATION v. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP, 355 Or. 476 – Or: Supreme Court 2014 – Google Scholar. This is an important issue in legal malpractice litigation – what happens to the communications between lawyers in a law firm and their in-house counsel. In this case the Oregon Supreme…

Updated:

Lawyer Converts Client Funds – But He Claims To Have Had A Good Reason For His Actions

Filed May 27. A lawyer converted $1300 in client funds and loaned those funds to his sick brother. He later repaid the funds to the client. However, the ARDC opened an investigation and the deception was found out.  The ARDC hearing board recommended a censure. The Review Board increased the…

Updated:

The Lawyer’s Duty of Candor To The Client – Should It Be Incorporated Into the Model Rules of Professional Conduct?

The Lawyer’s Duty of Candor to the Client – Should It Be Formally Defined? Is it ever appropriate to lie to your client? Judge Raymond J. McKoski, an adjunct professor of law at John Marshall Law School, has posted a thoughtful article on the lawyer’s duty of candor to the…

Updated:

Illinois Appellate Court Sanctions Lawyers For Failing To Disclose Contrary Authority

This is an unpublished case, captioned, In re Marriage of Marie Brinkley v. Leonard Przysucha, 2014 Ill App (1st) 131397-U. The case is a dispute over child support obligations. The respondent allegedly had a large balance of unpaid child support. The petitioner, however, had obtained a bankruptcy discharge and did…

Updated:

Insurer’s Legal Malpractice Action Against Defense Counsel Dismissed

WEST BEND MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. RODDY, LEAHY, GUILL & ZIEMA, LTD., Dist. Court, ND Illinois 2014 – Google Scholar. This is a legal malpractice case arising out of a defense of a workers compensation claim. West Bend alleged that the defense counsel retained to handle the workers compensation claim…

Updated:

Much Ado About Nothing – Negligence But No Damages

This is a legal malpractice case in which the plaintiff, after enormous effort, obtained a damages award of $2000 at trial. The Appellate Court affirmed the damage award.  Unfortunately, the Appellate Court issued an unpublished opinion, Hubertus Investment Group v. Smiegelski & Wator, P.C., 2014 IL App (1st) 131927-U. This…

Contact The Clinton Law Firm