By Will Jordan
Attorney represented Client in a workers’ compensation claim. Following settlement of the workers’ comp claim, Client filed a legal malpractice action against Attorney, alleging that Attorney gave incorrect legal advice that lead to the compromise and release and, but for the incorrect legal advice, Client would not have agreed to the settlement terms. The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed summary judgment in favor of Attorney, holding that a dissatisfied plaintiff may not file a lawsuit against his attorney following a settlement to which the plaintiff agreed, unless the plaintiff can show he was fraudulently induced to settle the original action. “It is not enough that the lawyer who negotiated the original settlement may have been negligent; rather, the party seeking to pursue a case against his lawyer after a settlement must plead, with specificity, fraud in the inducement.”
Silvagni v. Shorr, 113 A.3d 810 (Penn. Sup. Ct. March 27, 2015).
Read the full opinion here.
- Kelly Morrow joins board of Kids’ Chance of South Carolina
- Grady Beard named vice president of SCWCEA
- Janie Langdale joins Robinson Gray as director of marketing
- Robinson Gray’s Beth Burke Richardson named to receive Diversity & Inclusion Award
- Robinson Gray named to top tier in 2020 Best Law Firms in America
- Haigler named to prestigious Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel
- Beard and Till Poteat co-author latest edition of authoritative book on workers’ compensation
- Lisle Traywick joins the board of the South Carolina Chapter of the Federal Bar Association