Published on:

By

ALEO v. Weyant, Tenn: Court of Appeals 2013 – Google Scholar.

This is a growing area of legal malpractice liability for family law practitioners. After a divorce, one party claims that her lawyer failed to secure a portion of the other party’s pension. The divorce court has the right to apportion the pension plan, but unless it is done correctly, the apportionment will not take effect. In Illinois, the lawyers must enter a QDRO, a qualified domestic relations order.

In the above-captioned case the client alleged that the lawyer failed to include provisions in the marital settlement agreement necessary to divide a military pension. Unfortunately, the case was dismissed on statute of limitations grounds.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

The case is captioned Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. Robert Allan Wright, Jr., 13-0780, December 6, 2013.  The Iowa Supreme Court disciplined Wright for (a) failing to recognize a Nigerian scam and (b) allowing other clients to participate in the scam.  This case has received a fair amount of press attention, but the press has ignored the main issue in the case from a lawyer discipline perspective.

The trouble began when Wright was contacted by a client, Floyd Madison who informed Wright that Madison was the beneficiary of a large bequest from a long-lost cousin in Nigeria. Madison told Wright that he needed to pay $177,660 in inheritance taxes and then he (Madison) would receive the money. Most lawyers would have told Madison that the transaction was a scam. Wright, however, drafted a contingency fee agreement under which Wright would receive 10% of the inheritance in exchange for representing Madison.

Wright then made more mistakes. He urged several of his clients to loan money to Madison to help Madison pay the “inheritance taxes.”  At Wright’s urging, several of his other clients made loans to Madison. Wright placed the proceeds of the loans in his trust account. The opinion states “Wright stipulated that he failed to advise White, Stodden and Nunneman that they should seek independent counsel before making the loans to Madison.”

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Filed December 13.

This is a decision of the ARDC Review Board recommending a three-year suspension for a lawyer who attacked the integrity of four judges. The Review Board concluded that the statements were not protected by the First Amendment because the statements were obviously false. The lawyer accused the judges of corruption when they did not agree with him.

Rule 8.2(a) is relevant here. It provides in relevant part: ”

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

WEST BEND MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. RODDY, LEAHY, GUILL & ZIMA, LTD., Dist. Court, ND Illinois 2013 – Google Scholar.

This is an unpublished decision concerning an allegation of legal malpractice in a workers’ compensation case. The plaintiff is the insurance company. The defendants are the lawyers it hired to defend a workers’ compensation case. The court dismissed the complaint, with leave to file an amended complaint. The district court reasoned that the complaint did not state a plausible claim for relief, in that the complaint did not allege specific facts showing a negligent act by the lawyers. Instead, according to the Court, the complaint was couched in broad, general terms.

Published on:

By

IN RE KARAVIDAS, Ill: Supreme Court 2013 – Google Scholar.

This is an important decision by the Illinois Supreme Court. The Court considered whether to impose discipline on an attorney who acted as the executor of his father’s estate. As the executor the attorney took substantial loans from the Estate, although he later repaid the loans. Further, the attorney was a beneficiary of the estate.  Karavidas did not act as the lawyer for the estate. Karavidas was found out when a relative began examining trust records. The probate court removed Karavidas as the executor.

The Supreme Court held that Karavidas breached his fiduciary duty to the estate by making loans to himself. The Court declined to rule on whether he had converted estate property. In a decision that is counter-intuitive, the Court held that there was no proof that Karavidas violated any specific rule of professional conduct and that the charges should be dismissed. The court explains:

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Goyal v. GAS TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE, 718 F. 3d 713 – Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 2013 – Google Scholar.

The Seventh Circuit sanctioned an attorney for asserting an attorney lien long after the lawyer was terminated.

The Facts:

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

We receive many calls and other inquiries from former clients of other firms who believe that their lawyer made an error or committed legal malpractice. Here are few suggestions for those who wish to call us.

First, make sure that you have proof that the lawyer agreed to represent you. Proof can be an engagement letter or a cancelled check. A cancelled check is often the best proof because it prevents the lawyer from arguing that there was no attorney-client relationship.

Second, make sure you have a record of what the lawyer sent to you in writing. All too often written communications have been lost or thrown away by clients, preventing us from understanding how the relationship deteriorated.  Those written communications are critical. We often must spend lots of time tracking them down. Lawyers who have made an error often are reluctant to turn over their files.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Kadlec v. Sumner, Ill: Appellate Court, 1st Dist., 2nd Div. 2013 – Google Scholar.

This is an opinion affirming the dismissal of a contribution claim against an accounting firm.

The executor of an estate sued the lawyer for the estate, alleging that the lawyer failed to timely file estate tax returns and that the estate suffered a financial loss as a result. The lawyer then filed a contribution claim against the accounting firm. The trial court dismissed the contribution claim on the ground that the statute of limitations for accounting malpractice had expired.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Kramer v. AMERICAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, NA, Dist. Court, ND Illinois 2013 – Google Scholar.

Magistrate Cole has written an opinion denying a motion to disqualify an attorney for a plaintiff class in a class action.

The plaintiffs are represented by Ari Karen. The defendant is the American National Bank. The Bank claimed that Karen formed an attorney-client relationship with the Bank by exchanging confidential information with one of the bank’s management consultants at a seminar. Magistrate Cole rejected the claim and concluded that the Bank’s consultant did not provide credible testimony.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

The case is captioned In the Matter of Thomas M. Dixon, 71S00-1104-D1-196.

The Indiana Supreme Court dismissed all charges against Thomas Dixon, an attorney who represented 85 pro-life protestors in proceedings before Judge Jenny Pitts Manier.  Judge Manier is married “to Professor Edward Manier, who was a tenured professor at Notre Dame and taught there for 48 years.”

Dixon filed a motion for a change of judge. He sought Judge Manier’s recusal “based on her husband’s alleged advocacy in favor of pro-choice causes and academic freedom for Notre Dame, along with Judge Manier’s failure to disclose this alleged advocacy. [Dixon] argued that his clients were arrested because they acted on beliefs about abortion and academic freedom for Notre Dame that were directly contrary to the beliefs allegedly advocated by Professor Manier during her career….In addition [Dixon] cited Judge Manier’s allegedly erroneous rulings in [a prior case involving abortion-rights protestors.].”

Continue reading →
Contact Information
111 W Washington St, #1437
Chicago, IL 60602 Phone: 312.357.1515

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2025, The Clinton Law Firm
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design