Featured Firms
Presented by BigVoodoo
A federal judge in Philadelphia ruled that a legal malpractice insurer has no duty to cover a lawyer who failed to disclose a former client's potential claim -- even if the lawyer believed the statute of limitations had already run on the claim. The judge said the lawyer's belief that an action wouldn't have merit or that the statute of limitations might have run isn't enough to avoid enforcement of an insurer's exclusion policy.
April 28, 2003 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Presented by BigVoodoo
Join the industry's top owners, investors, developers, brokers & financiers at THE MULTIFAMILY EVENT OF THE YEAR!
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.
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