“What I am asking for is a sea change. … But what I am asking would actually lessen the amount of [malpractice] cases,” attorney Matthew Weisberg told the justices. “An attorney’s efforts may prevent the malpractice or mitigate the malpractice.”
October 21, 2020 at 04:00 PM
1 minute read
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday on whether an attorney’s continued representation of a client following an alleged occurrence of legal malpractice should toll the statute of limitations for bringing a malpractice claim against the lawyer.
Attorney Matthew Weisberg of Weisberg Law, who is representing the mother and son plaintiffs, Monica and David Clark, argued it should run through the adoption of the Continuance Representation Rule, or CRR.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
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.
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
Photo: Vitalii Vodolazskyi/Shutterstock.com
