We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 26

Duty to defend not triggered by allegations outside professional services coverage

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 6 2008

The United States District Court for the District of Colorado, applying Colorado law, has held that allegations in several lawsuits brought against a real estate investment trust did not trigger the insurer's duty to defend the trust under miscellaneous professional liability policies that covered the provision of professional services

Funnell v Adams & Remers claimants’ costs of extricating themselves from predicament caused by solicitors’ negligence are recoverable

  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • October 12 2007

The claimants instructed the defendant solicitors to act for them in the negotiation of a lease of new business premises

The Court of Appeal exercises its duty to say that the judge applied the law to the facts wrongly, regarding extent of retainer

  • RPC
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • October 10 2007

In February 1993, Stone Heritage Developments Limited (S) entered into a Development Agreement with the Howarths (H) who were owners of land at Moss Lane, Bolton, whereby S would build not less than 20 houses on H’s land which H would retain

California Supreme Court grants review of appellate ruling in Beacon v. Skidmore

  • Wilson Elser
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 11 2013

On December 20, 2012, we issued an alert regarding the case of Beacon Residential Community Association v. Skidmore, Owings and Merrill LLP, where

Court rejects insurer’s attempt to rescind lawyer's policy and holds prior knowledge exclusion does not bar coverage

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 1 2009

A federal district court has held that a law firm could not have reasonably foreseen that its client would file a malpractice suit against it when it applied for and obtained a renewal of its lawyers professional liability policy, concluding that the attempted real estate transaction giving rise to the suit was thwarted by the client’s own actionsnot the law firm’sand noting that the client continued to work with the firm in related litigation following the canceled transaction

Legal malpractice: real estate developer alleges law firm failed to conduct environmental due diligence

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 21 2010

A real estate developer has sued a Louisiana-based law firm alleging that the firm failed to perform an environmental assessment which would have revealed that land it purchased for development was part of a World War II-era bombing range

Damages for loss of business premises: how much can a tenant recover?

  • Nabarro LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • April 13 2010

In a recent case, the tenants of a shop lost the right to renew their business tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (the "Act") because of a mistake by their solicitors

Standard of care of home inspectors and limitation of liability clauses

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 10 2010

In Salgado v. Toth (November 11, 2009), the British Columbia Supreme Court considered the standard of care of a reasonably prudent home inspector and more importantly, the effectiveness or, moreover, ineffectiveness, of limitation of liability clauses in the professional context

Reliance on counsel

  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • February 23 2011

Where a solicitor, who had been instructed to act for a landowner in respect of planning issues concerning a quarry, had received potentially confusing advice from counsel, the solicitor was negligent in failing to clarify the advice

Ohio environmental statutes of limitation: did the Ohio Supreme Court affect environmental claims?

  • Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 10 2011

The Ohio Supreme Court’s decision on April 27 in Flagstar Bank, F.S.B. v. Airline Union’s Mortgage Company, et al, 2011-Ohio-1961, raises interesting environmental questions