A legal malpractice claim against a suspended northern Indiana attorney and his firm will continue after the Indiana Supreme Court found a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the plaintiff’s premises liability claim would have succeeded had the firm not failed to timely file her complaint.
The fate of a legal malpractice claim will be decided by the Indiana Supreme Court next week after the justices hear oral arguments to decide whether the claim can continue. Justices also will hear a case challenging the probable cause that led to a man's conviction after discovery of a marijuana grow.
Legal malpractice cases are unique negligence actions where the parties must litigate a “case-within-a-case.” It is ironic that, within this framework, the malpractice lawyer who is defending an attorney-client often must argue against the merits of a cause of action or an issue that the attorney-client once advocated.
A northern Indiana law firm will have another opportunity to prevent a malpractice claim against it from moving forward after the Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to the case in which the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment for the firm.
After finding an order granting summary judgment to an Indianapolis law firm facing a legal malpractice claim was not a final order, the Indiana Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal challenging the summary judgment ruling.
A former associate of now-disgraced Indianapolis attorney William Conour scored a victory in the Indiana Court of Appeals Friday when the court found he did not breach a duty to one of Conour’s clients who accused him of providing inaccurate or misleading information.
The Indiana Supreme Court will not consider the issue of whether Indiana’s largest law firm was properly granted summary judgment in a legal malpractice suit, denying transfer to a case that raised concerns about attorneys’ ability to indemnify themselves against malpractice allegations.
After granting rehearing to clarify the difference between the instant legal malpractice case and previous malpractice caselaw, the Indiana Court of Appeals on Tuesday reaffirmed its previous decision to deny summary judgment to a northern Indiana law firm.
A law firm must face a malpractice suit for failing to file a tort claim notice on behalf of a woman who was seriously injured by an attacker and whose daughter was killed. The assailant was the subject of an active protective order that authorities failed to find before releasing him from jail.