Contingency Fee • Unauthorized Practice of Law • Issue Preclusion • Claim Preclusion
The Law Offices of Joseph Q. Mirarchi Legal Serv., P.C. v. Thorpe, PICS Case No. 17-1413 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 29, 2017) Beetlestone, J. (17 pages).
Plaintiff’s complaint seeking to recover legal fees from a contingency fee agreement to represent defendants in a dispute with their property insurer was dismissed with prejudice because a prior court had determined that plaintiff was not entitled to the legal fees since he was terminated for unlawful activity–the unauthorized practice of law and the failure to disclose his suspension to clients–and the current action asserting breach of contract, detrimental reliance, unjust enrichment and other claims against defendants and others was barred by the final judgment that foreclosed his equitable or legal rights to a contingency fee. Dismissed.
