Julie Buhler, et al. v. Lefkovitz & Lefkovitz, PLLC

Summary

The Tennessee Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment dismissing Julie Buhler’s legal malpractice action against Lefkovitz & Lefkovitz, PLLC. The court held that the plaintiff could not establish cause-in-fact or proximate causation because the installment sales contract had been terminated before attorney Steven Lefkovitz was retained, leaving Buhler no legal right to cure the breach. The court also concluded that the trial court’s reliance on the bankruptcy court’s ultimate contract conclusion did not require reversal.

Holdings

1. Buhler's unequivocal statement before the extended maturity date that she could not and would not pay the balance constituted anticipatory repudiation, and the Sellers elected to terminate the contract by demanding that she vacate and returning later installment payments.
2. Buhler failed to establish that Lefkovitz's conduct was either the cause-in-fact or the proximate cause of her alleged damages because the contract had already terminated and she had no legal right to cure when Lefkovitz was retained.
3. The letter did not offer Buhler an option to cure; it demanded that she vacate the premises.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because Buhler failed to establish that Lefkovitz's conduct was the cause-in-fact of her alleged damages.
2. Whether the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because Buhler failed to establish that Lefkovitz's negligence was the proximate cause of her alleged damages.
3. Whether the installment sales contract had terminated before Lefkovitz was retained, leaving Buhler without a legal right to cure.
4. Whether the January 24, 2022 letter from the Sellers' counsel offered Buhler a ten-day opportunity to cure.

Disposition

affirmed