Shotell v. Rothman
Defendant Larry Rothman appeals from a judgment for plaintiffs George Shotell, Jr., and Danette K. Shotell on their legal malpractice complaint. He contends insufficient evidence showed causation i.e., plaintiffs would have obtained a better result but for defendants negligent representation of them in lease negotiations with their tenant and the ensuing breach of lease litigation.
Court agree. Insufficient evidence showed plaintiffs would have obtained the three-year personal guarantee they sought from their tenants principal but for defendants transactional negligence. The principal testified he would not have agreed to that guarantee. No substantial evidence showed otherwise. And insufficient evidence showed plaintiffs would have held the principal personally liable for the tenants unpaid rent but for defendants litigation negligence. No substantial evidence supported the alter ego or fraud theories defendant failed to pursue. We reverse.
Comments on Shotell v. Rothman