A family court order requiring a divorce litigant to pay a law firm $50,000 in fees, even though he had a malpractice case pending against the firm, has been upheld on appeal. A New Jersey court ruled there was no error in ordering and enforcing the fee award, because the client neither asked the family court for a stay nor sought to consolidate the malpractice and matrimonial cases. The court also noted the lower court "expressly carved out the malpractice issue from its decision, and made no findings on those allegations."
February 10, 2010 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
A family court order requiring a divorce litigant to pay Budd Larner $50,000 in legal fees, even though he had a malpractice case pending against the firm, has been upheld on appeal.
The New Jersey Appellate Division ruled on Monday that there was no error in ordering and enforcing the fee award to the Short Hills, N.J., firm, because the client neither asked the family court for a stay nor sought to consolidate the malpractice and matrimonial cases.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
Join the Mendocino County District Attorney s Office and work in Mendocino County home to redwoods, vineyards and picturesque coastline. ...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
