Yesterday we reported on a legal malpractice case in which the attorney "helped" the client to get insurance payments, but did not bring a personal injury action against the pilot or the owner of the private plane which crashed into plaintiff’s house.

Today the Poppe Law Firm Blog reports that "In one of the largest legal malpractice verdicts in Kentucky history, a jury returned a verdict today against attorney Steve Keeney for $5 million. The allegations of legal malpractice arise out of his handling of a case for Brenda Osborne, of Middlesboro. The Jefferson Circuit Court jury determine that Keeney lost a federal court case stemming from the an airplane accident in which she could have recovered about $1.3 million (this is known as the "case within a case." It awarded her that amount, as well as $250,000 for mental anguish. The jury also voted 11-1 to award of $3.5 million in punitive damages, which are meted out to deter and punish intentional and willful misconduct.

This was an unusual case because Osborne was not physically injured when a small plane crashed into her home. She escaped her home without physical injury–however, Keeney told her the case was worth about a $1 million. This jury agreed with her; however, it’s Keeney’s legal malpractice insurance company that will have to pay the verdict, not the pilot of the plane. "

A judge is hired to write a will for a disabled man, and it all ends up with the Judge being sued and then having to give back $ 1.2 million in fees and 600 acres of land.  It’s the middle part we cant figure out.

"A Washington County judge has been ordered to repay $1.2 million to a woman he represented in an estate case and give her back 600 acres of land, according to a Mobile County Circuit Court ruling.

Stuart DuBose, who was elected last year to serve as circuit judge over Choctaw, Clarke and Washington counties, responded in a letter faxed to Mobile County Circuit Judge John Lockett by saying that Lockett’s ruling was "not legal" and "immoral."

"This order must not become public knowledge," DuBose wrote. "It must not be recorded. It will ruin me professionally and further ruin me financially According to court documents, Weaver soured on DuBose shortly after Sullivan died. After DuBose clarified in a letter that his cut of the estate was a fee of 40 percent, or about $1.2 million, she fired him as her attorney and tried to drop him as the estate’s lawyer.

Weaver sued DuBose, accusing him of malpractice, misrepresentation and negligence, as well as designating himself both the attorney for the estate and for Weaver without ever informing her of a potential conflict of interest. That suit was tossed out.

The original settlement was kept confidential. Court files do not specify all the terms of the settlement or make clear Lockett’s reasoning for ruling that DuBose failed to live up to the terms.

Lockett ruled that DuBose or the Sullivan estate must pay Weaver $1.19 million. In addition, Lockett said DuBose must return three parcels totaling 605 acres to Weaver within 30 days because DuBose violated the settlement order when splitting Sullivan’s land between his law firm and Weaver "

Law.Com reports  on Positive Software Solutions, et al. v. Susman Godfrey, et al.  filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in Dallas, Positive Software and its Chief Executive Officer Edward Mandel allege that the defendants — Susman Godfrey; firm partners Barry C. Barnett and Ophelia F. Camina of Dallas; Frank Nese, a senior manager at New Century; Jeff Lemieux, the CEO of a New Century-associated entity; and John Norment, New Century’s chief technology officer for its retail division — engaged in fraud and civil conspiracy by knowingly withholding evidence and offering false testimony during a 2004 arbitration hearing and before the district court over a dispute between New Century and Positive Software concerning the ownership of proprietary software. The plaintiffs also bring a copyright infringement action.

This Kentucky woman was sitting home, minding her own business when a plane crashed into the house.  She hired an attorney.

"An English teacher at Pineville High School, Osborne was devastated by the crash, which destroyed her home and belongings. Her blood pressure skyrocketed and her diabetes flared, according to her doctor, and each time she returned to sift through the contents of her former home, she broke into tears, she said.

She thought Keeney’s fee was expensive, but he promised that she had a strong case against the pilot, who owned the plane.

The National Transportation Safety Board’s findings, while not admissible in court, said the probable causes of the crash were inadequate maintenance and the pilot’s decision to fly with a "known deficiency."

Before the pilot took off, a mechanic saw him spraying fuel from a squirt bottle into an engine, which then backfired and burst into flames. The pilot departed anyway but got only 50 feet off the ground before losing power and crashing into Osborne’s attic. The pilot and a passenger survived, but were seriously injured.

The month after retaining Keeney, they met with the company’s adjuster, who had already cut checks for $151,390 for the loss of her home.

Even though Keeney had done "nothing to earn it," Sitlinger said, Keeney took 20 percent — about $30,000. After paying off her $96,000 mortgage, Osborne was left with about $24,000.

A few months later, after Osborne painstakingly worked to draw up an inventory of the home’s contents, State Farm paid out another $72,051; Keeney took 20 percent — again, "for no work," Sitlinger said.

Keeney claimed he sent $5,573 to Osborne’s ex-husband, David Osborne, to cover items he had stored in the house, but David Osborne swore later in a deposition that he never received it.

When she inquired about a third check from State Farm, for $11,000 in replacement costs, she discovered Keeney had deposited the check in his personal account — rather than an escrow account, as required by ethics rules, Sitlinger said.

Keeney had endorsed her signature, which he said he had the authority to do under a contract he produced only after Osborne sued him. He also testified that she had authorized him to put the money in his personal account.

"That’s a lie," Sitlinger told the jury. "I can’t sugarcoat it."

Supersize it!  Not a Wendy’s advertising pitch. but this legal malpractice case took place in one.  This case is being cited for Federal jurisdiction and removal [not areas we cover often], but for us, the issue will be whether employees have standing and privity to sue attorneys hired by their employer.  We think not, and will follow.

"This consolidated action was initiated by plaintiffs, including present and former employees of defendant Café Express LLC (“CEL”). CEL is a restaurant established by defendant Augusta Foods, LLC (“Augusta”), with majority stock holder being defendant Wendy’s International (“Wendy’s”). Plaintiffs alleged, that in exchange for weekly payroll deductions, defendants CEL, August and Wendy’s agreed to arrange to file and prosecute the employees’ Applications for Alien Employment certification (“Applications”) under The Life Act Amendments of 2000, 8 U.S.C. § 1255 (i) (1) (B) and (C) (the “Life Act”). The Life Act enabled certain aliens to apply for an adjustment to permanent resident status, provided the Application was submitted by April 30, 2001.

The restaurant defendants arranged with various law firms to prosecute the Applications, but the plaintiffs contended the defendant attorneys failed to file the Applications by the deadline. Additionally, despite this filing error, the restaurant defendants failed to notify the plaintiffs until July of 2006 and continued to deduct weekly fees. The plaintiffs alleged the defendants were liable under the following legal theories: legal malpractice, breach of contract, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, restitution, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud or intentional misrepresentation. "

This case, similar tothose in which union employees are unable to sue an attorney provided to them by the union, will no doubt be reported again.  Follow with us.

IPOs mean big money, Securities trading means big money, and the REFCO IPO has led to a $1 Billion legal malpractice case.  This story is all about big money.

"A court-appointed trustee responsible for retrieving funds for Refco Inc. creditors has sought more than $2 billion in damages from a prominent Chicago law firm, three accounting firms and several investment banks that played a role in Refco’s 2005 initial public offering.

The trustee, Marc S. Kirschner, filed a lawsuit Tuesday against law firm Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Mawe; accounting firms Grant Thornton, Ernst & Young and PricewaterhouseCoopers; and Credit Suisse Securities, Bank of America and Deutsche Bank Securities, the investment banks involved in the $583 million IPO.

The IPO, Kirschner said in an interview, was the "cashing-out portion" of a long-running fraud. It came after years of building an illusion that Refco was a successful brokerage, an effort begun by its former Chief Executive Phillip Bennett, but one that could not have been carried out without the help of outside professionals. "

Bennett has pleaded not guilty to fraud charges connected to $430 million worth of hidden bad debt.

Law.Com reports: "A unanimous panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal upheld a $1 million legal malpractice judgment against the law firm Gunster Yoakley & Stewart awarded to the heirs of the Gannett newspaper fortune.

The case arose from a dispute over the estate of Charles V. McAdam Jr., a wealthy Palm Beach, Fla., resident who was married to Sarah Gannett — daughter of Frank Gannett, the founder of one of the largest newspaper chains in the country. His two sons sued Gunster, shareholder Daniel A. Hanley and JPMorgan for breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, civil conspiracy and unjust enrichment.

On Wednesday, the 4th DCA panel, in an opinion written by Judge Mark E. Polen, said the "plaintiffs showed that their father’s intent, as expressed in his will, was frustrated by the negligence of Gunster Yoakley and that, as a direct result of such negligence, their legacy was diminished."

Attorneys for two sons of McAdam could not be reached for comment. Gunster Yoakley did not provide comment by deadline Wednesday. The firm’s attorneys, Louis Mrachek and Alan Rose of Mrachek Fitzgerald and Rose in West Palm Beach, did not return phone calls seeking comment. "

This case takes a graph to try to understand.  Here is a legal malpractice case in Texas, involving BP and an explosion.

Plaintiffs hire attorney Krist to sue BP, after an explosion.  Krist successfully sues BP and settles the case, taking no fee.  Krist represented the husband only, and not the wife in a loss of consortium claim.

Then Krist moves to the other side, and starts to defend BP in other explosion cases.  Plaintiff sues Krist, using a rival and antagonistic attorney to sue.  Claims that Krist settled for too little, should have represented wife, and sold plaintiff out.

"The high-stakes battle over whether Houston lawyer Ronald D. Krist should help defend BP from suits filed over a deadly explosion at the company’s Texas City refinery took another twist on Monday when a former client who had hired Krist’s firm to sue BP over the explosion filed a professional negligence suit against Krist, the firm and others.

Jose L. Elizondo, who filed Jose L. Elizondo v. Ronald D. Krist, et al. in state court in Harris County on Aug. 20, is one of four individuals who hired the Krist Law Firm to seek damages from BP for the 2005 explosion, which killed 15 people and caused injuries and property damage.

Elizondo is represented by John M. O’Quinn and Michael J. Lowenberg of the O’Quinn Law Firm of Houston.

In early 2006, Elizondo and three other clients accepted settlements — without filing suits — that Ronald Krist negotiated with BP. Krist subsequently signed on to help defend BP in other litigation related to the explosion. "