Reseña de Dan Smith and Susan Smith v. James R. Long

Dan Smith and Susan Smith v. James R. Long de Court of Appeals of Wisconsin Resumen del Libro

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company (Fidelity) appeals a judgment denying it the right to reimbursement from the settlement proceeds of the legal malpractice action against attorney James Long. The court ruled that Dan and Susan Smith's legal malpractice action was based in contract and, therefore, Fidelity had no right to reimbursement under sec. 102.29, Stats. Fidelity argues that the trial court erred by: (1) finding that the Smiths' cause of action against Long was based in contract, and (2) concluding that it was not entitled to reimbursement pursuant to sec. 102.29, Stats. While we agree that the trial court erred by concluding that the Smiths' cause of action was based in contract, we conclude that Fidelity was not entitled to reimbursement under sec. 102.29. Because the second issue resolves the dispute, we affirm.

👋 ¿Te encanta el libro Dan Smith and Susan Smith v. James R. Long? ¿Podría compartir por favor?

Dan Smith and Susan Smith v. James R. Long (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin) Análisis y Personajes

Comentario de Dan Smith and Susan Smith v. James R. Long, libro de Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

¿Ya leíste este libro? ¿Qué opinas del libro Dan Smith and Susan Smith v. James R. Long de Court of Appeals of Wisconsin? ¡Haga una pregunta a la comunidad de bookpedia.co sobre Dan Smith and Susan Smith v. James R. Long!