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.
- Robinson Gray Member Beth Richardson recognized as a 2019 Woman of Influence
- New measure sets flat, predictable fees in Register of Deeds offices in SC
- Robinson Gray again named as ‘Band 1’ firm in general commercial litigation by Chambers USA
- Veteran tax attorney Timothy Thompson joins Robinson Gray law firm
- Beth Richardson joins Spring 2019 Class of Diversity Leaders Initiative
- Celeste Bowers joins board of Palmetto Land Title Association
- Seven Robinson Gray attorneys named Super Lawyers; five named Rising Stars
- Ashley Johnson joins Columbia’s Design Development and Review Commission