Grayson v. Wofsey, Rosen, Kweskin And Kuriansky

646 A.2d 195 (1994)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Grayson (P) sued her attorneys Kweskin and Margolis and their law firm (D) alleging legal malpractice in preparation and settlement of her divorce action. In 1981, H brought an action against P for dissolution of their marriage. P on advice of D settled the case on the third day of the dissolution trial. P got $150,000 lump sum payment and $12,000 per year periodic alimony. The trial judge found that settlement fair and reasonable and accordingly rendered judgment incorporating the settlement agreement. P moved to have the judgment reopened on the grounds that the settlement agreement was procured by fraud. That was denied. P also sued D for malpractice. During the malpractice trial, P entered evidence by experts that Ds had failed to properly value the marital estate and H's various businesses and that this failure fell below the standard of care for an attorney in a marital dissolution. Ds presented evidence that their representation of P was proper and to the standard of care required. The jury returned a verdict of $1,500,000 for P. D appealed.