Summary
The Utah Supreme Court held that settling an underlying redemption lawsuit before completion of an appeal did not categorically abandon a legal malpractice claim. However, summary judgment for the attorney was proper because judicial error, rather than the attorney's conduct, proximately caused the client's loss, where the attorney had raised the relevant objections to treble damages and the applicable redemption rule.
Holdings
- Settlement of the underlying redemption lawsuit before completion of appellate review did not, by itself, abandon or forfeit Shangri-La's legal-malpractice claim. The court declined to adopt the abandonment doctrine as a categorical rule.
- When an attorney raises and preserves the relevant legal arguments in an appropriate procedural manner, and the court nevertheless commits judicial error, the attorney's conduct is not the proximate cause of the client's resulting loss. Summary judgment is appropriate when the undisputed facts establish that judicial error, rather than attorney malpractice, caused the injury.
- Summary judgment for Turner was proper because the undisputed facts showed that Turner's actions did not proximately cause Shangri-La's damages.
Questions Presented
- Whether settling the underlying redemption lawsuit before completion of appellate review abandoned or forfeited Shangri-La's legal-malpractice claim.
- Whether judicial error, rather than Turner's alleged malpractice, proximately caused Shangri-La's claimed damages.
- Whether summary judgment was proper where Turner had raised the relevant objections to the unlawful-detainer statute and Rule 69(j) before the underlying trial court entered its final ruling.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (19)
- Swan Creek Vill. Homeowners Ass'n v. Warne, 2006 UT 22, 134 P.3d 1122(followed)
- Arndt v. First Interstate Bank of Utah N.A., 1999 UT 91, 991 P.2d 584(followed)
- Pa. Ins. Guar. Ass'n v. Sikes, 590 So. 2d 1051 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)(limited)
- Segall v. Segall, 632 So. 2d 76 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)(limited)
- E.B.P., Inc. v. Cozza & Steuer, 119 Ohio App. 3d 177, 694 N.E.2d 1376 (1997)(limited)
- Rodriguez v. Fredericks, 213 A.D.2d 176, 623 N.Y.S.2d 241 (1995)(limited)
- Chem. Bank of N.J. Nat'l Ass'n v. Bailey, 296 N.J. Super. 515, 687 A.2d 316 (Ct. App. Div. 1997)(limited)
- Parker v. Graham & James, 715 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)(followed)
- Lenahan v. Forkey, 702 So. 2d 610 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)(followed)
- Fusco v. Fauci, 299 A.D.2d 263, 749 N.Y.S.2d 715 (2002)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 19.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…