Powers v. Hayes, 172 Vt. 535

Summary

The Vermont Supreme Court reversed summary judgment in an attorney malpractice action arising from an attorney's failure to advise a client that an IRA beneficiary designation would control over the client's will. The court held that circumstantial evidence of the client's intent and efforts to provide his assets to his daughter created a genuine issue of material fact regarding proximate causation.

Holdings

1. The evidence was sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Powers would have changed his IRA beneficiary had he known that doing so was necessary to accomplish his estate-planning intent; therefore, summary judgment for defendants was improper.
2. On summary judgment, the court must treat allegations supported by admissible evidence as true and draw reasonable doubts and inferences in favor of the nonmoving party.

Questions Presented

1. Whether summary judgment was proper where circumstantial evidence created a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the attorney's alleged negligence proximately caused the loss of the IRA proceeds.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded