A criminal defense lawyer sued for malpractice should have been allowed to pursue evidence to bolster his claim that the ex-client was convicted because he was guilty, an appeals court says.

Tuesday’s precedential ruling in Marrero v. Feintuch, A-5879-09, reverses a decision quashing a subpoena issued on behalf of Howard Feintuch, of Feintuch, Porwich & Feintuch in Jersey City.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]