A legal saga that started with a chunk of concrete hurled in 1981 ended Thursday -- perhaps temporarily -- with a $1.2 million judgment, a reinstated fraud action and a cheeky opinion from a California appeals court. Seemingly puzzled that a dispute thought settled 26 years ago is still inspiring litigation, the panel held that a woman could sue for breach of contract even if the pact was linked to a legal-fee agreement deemed unenforceable because the woman's attorney-husband had written it improperly.
May 07, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
The legal saga started with a chunk of concrete hurled more than a quarter century ago.
It ended Thursday — perhaps temporarily — with a $1.2 million judgment, a reinstated fraud action and a cheeky opinion from Justice Kenneth Yegan of California’s Second 2nd District Court of Appeal.
Deal Watch: Skadden, Sidley, Slaughter and S&C Lead Big Paper Deal, While Private Funds Grow Massive
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.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
