Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

CHARLES E. ARD, APPELLANT, v. MORTON D. AULLS, ET AL., APPELLEES.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a summary final judgment in a legal malpractice case. Appellees failed to file a lis pendens against real property which was the subject of a lawsuit in which appellees were the lawyers for appellant. Had they filed the lis pendens perhaps a quiet title judgment would not have been rendered against appellant. It is alleged the lawyers were negligent. That is a question for the jury to decide — was there a legal duty (to properly represent Ard) which they breached (by not recording the lis pendens) which caused (was the alleged breach the cause) injury (was there an injury) to Ard? Jury questions are not decided by summary judgment.

The judgment is reversed and this cause remanded for trial.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

UPCHURCH and SHARP, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

ARD v. AULLS
(Nov 4, 1985)