An out-of-state law firm can’t avoid a lawsuit in the Indiana Commercial Court alleging legal malpractice in its handling of litigation that arose from failed efforts pitching a minor league baseball team for Kokomo.
A woman who filed a legal malpractice claim in a matter that began more than 20 years ago failed to convince the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that her complaint over the distribution of a trust was timely.
An Indianapolis attorney being sued by a former client in a post-conviction relief case faced a reversal Monday after the Indiana Court of Appeals found that the client’s complaint alleging violations of certain canons of the Rules of Professional Conduct did not deprive the trial court of jurisdiction over the case.
Indiana Supreme Court justices have issued a 60-day stayed suspension for a Fishers attorney who acknowledged he failed to properly represent a client in a divorce case and mishandled another client’s workplace sexual harassment claim.
Faegre Baker Daniels is being sued by a former client in the cryptocurrency industry who claims the law firm provided erroneous advice that led to allegations of federal security laws violations and a $200,000 fine by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Judgment will be entered for a northern Indiana law firm facing a legal malpractice claim after the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the denial of the firm’s motion for judgment on the evidence.
A Carmel-based real estate company has filed a lawsuit against Krieg DeVault, alleging the Indianapolis-based law firm’s failure to file a property deed in 2003 in a transaction involving defunct retailer HHGregg could now cost the real estate company millions of dollars.
Judgment for an Anderson attorney who allegedly failed to act in his client’s post-conviction relief case for nearly seven years after collecting a nearly $25,000 retainer was upheld by the Indiana Court of Appeals. The panel affirmed a trial court ruling that the ex-client’s legal malpractice claim was time-barred.
A Florida-based attorney who was found to have violated a dozen of Indiana’s professional conduct rules has lost his Indiana law license, effective immediately. The Indiana Supreme Court found the lawyer’s dishonesty and neglect of cases had harmed clients and placed himself and others in legal peril.
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for a Bloomington lawyer accused of legal malpractice, finding the evidence negated the proximate cause element of the claim.
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.