Gray•Duffy Attorney Wins Major Legal Malpractice Defense Verdict

January 2005

Frank J. Ozello of our Encino Office, in a Jury Trial, recently obtained a defense verdict for our client in a legal malpractice case, wherein professional negligence, negligence and breach of contract were tried to a jury. The defense verdict came in at 12-0 for Frank’s client.

Frank represented an attorney against two plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs alleged our client should have filed a cross-complaint against a large international bank while our client represented the Plaintiffs, as defendants, in the underlying action. Plaintiffs claimed that our client should have and was obligated to file a cross complaint against this large international bank alleging violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”).

In the underlying action the large international bank sued the plaintiffs for failing to pay a debt the bank claimed they owed. Thereafter, in light of the non-payment by the defendants the bank placed delinquencies on the defendants credit, which the defendants claimed cause them substantial monetary losses. These losses purportedly amounted to at least $2 Million. The underlying Action, wherein Frank’s client represented the then Defendants (now Plaintiffs), was lost. Thereafter, the losing Defendants became Plaintiffs against our client.

Frank argued to the jury that his client, the attorney, had no obligation to file a cross complaint on the Plaintiffs behalf for several reasons. One facet of this argument was that Frank’s client had culled this responsibility out of his retention. Another facet was that RESPA, in total, as well as many of its facets, collectively, or individually, did not apply. Other arguments utilized by Frank were that there was no breach of any duty, no causation and no damages despite Plaintiffs claims.

The trial lasted for over three weeks. The jury returned with a verdict, (12-0), in less than one hour, in favor of Frank’s client.

Jerry Handley and Katherine Handley v. David Peterson et al, San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. CV 990729.t.

Please Note: This article is necessarily general in nature and is not a substitute for legal advice with respect to any particular case. Readers should consult with an attorney before taking any action affecting their interests.