Melany Kotlarek

In a contentious legal malpractice case alleging numerous allegations about representation, obtained summary judgment and dismissal  of all claims in favor of attorney and her law firm.

Appellate court affirmed dismissal of legal malpractice case against counsel based upon finding that criminal indictment was sufficient to put plaintiff on notice of potential claims.

Summary judgment granted in favor of an attorney and his law firm. The attorney was accused of legal malpractice regarding his representation of his client who was the wife that had a business dispute with her husband’s family-owned business. The wife claimed over six figures in damages against the attorney and filed the legal malpractice suit as the power of attorney for her husband. There was little case law as to the applicability of the attorney-client relationship when a power of attorney is involved in this scenario and also where the wife was trying to state claims that as a spouse she had standing and privity to bring the legal malpractice claim and how the statute of limitations applied as a result. The trial court initially agreed that the case was barred by the statute of limitations granting judgment on the pleadings in favor of our clients. However, this was then reversed and remanded as the appellate court ruled there were sufficient allegations in the pleadings to state a claim. After discovery, Andy and Melany won again as they filed a motion for summary judgment which the trial court granted holding that the claims were barred by the statute of limitations and the wife lacked standing as a spouse and also under the power of attorney to bring her claim.