» District of Columbia

Legal Malpractice Claim Arising From Criminal Representation Barred By Collateral Estoppel

In Johnson v. Sullivan, the Court dismissed a legal malpractice claim arising out of prior criminal representation, based in part on the doctrine of defensive collateral estoppel. The plaintiff brought a legal malpractice action against his former criminal attorneys, who had represented him at trial and in post-trial procee… Read More
Read More

Racial Discrimination and Hostile Work Environment Claims in D.C. in in summary judgment

In Akridge v. Gallaudet University, No. 06-0346 (D.D.C. Aug. 3, 2010), Judge Urbina granted summary judgment to defendant Gallaudet University. The plaintiff, a hearing-impaired African-American male employed at the university, had aplied for the position of Career Center Director. Although the plaintiff was among 13 out… Read More
Read More

Trial Court’s Refusal to Allow Plaintiff To Name Substitute Expert Affirmed by D.C. Court of Appeals

In French v. Levitt, No. 09-CV-94 (D.C. July 8, 2010), the D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion to designate a new liability expert and for a continuance. However, this result was based on an unusual combination of factors that is unlikely to recur often. The plaintiff ha… Read More
Read More

Abuse of process claim in District of Columbia ends with summary judgment for defense

In Houlahan v. World wide Associationof Specialty Programs and Schools, 677 F.Supp. 2d 195 (D.D.C. Jan. 5, 2010), the Court awarded summary judgment to the defendants on the plaintiff’s claim of abuse of process. The abuse of process claim was grounded on a defamation lawsuit that the defendants had filed against th… Read More
Read More

Legal Malpractice opinion in D.C. declines to follow exhaustion of appeals rule

In Bleck v. Power, 955 A.2d 712 (D.C. Sept. 4, 2008), the D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling that the plaintiff’s malpractice suit was barred by the three-year statute of limitations. The issue was when the cause of action for legal malpractice accrued. The legal malpractice suit arose out… Read More
Read More

Legal Malpractice Suit in D.C. Dismissed For Plaintiff’s Lack of Expert Testimony

In Footbridge Limited Trust v. Zhang, 584 F.Supp. 2d 150 (D.D.C. Nov. 5, 2008), Judge Kollar-Kotelly dismissed a legal malpractice suit due to plaintiff's lack of expert testimony to support the claim. The suit arose out of a real estate closing in which the plaintiff had loaned certain non-party borrowers $1.5 mill… Read More
Read More

Legal Malpractice Suit Dismissed Following Daubert Challenge to Mold Expert

In Young v. Burton, 567 F.Supp.2d 121 (D.D.C. July 22, 2008), the plaintiffs filed a legal malpractice claim based on the defendants’ alleged failure to file a timely personal injury lawsuit. The underlying suit was a claim for damages suffered by plaintiffs as a result of exposure to toxic mold while residing at an… Read More
Read More

Legal malpractice: Defense of Judgmental Immunity Recognized in D.C.

In Biomet, Inc. v. Finnegan Henderson LLP, No. 07-CV-813 (D.C. March 19, 2009), the Court formally recognized the defense of judgmental immunity in legal malpractice actions. Concerning this defense, the Court stated the following: Essentially, the judgmental immunity doctrine provides that an informed professional judgm… Read More
Read More