Summary Judgment for Lawyers Sued for Malpractice Reversed
Post 4910
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gddZ4P4g, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gpVMqxu7 and at https://lnkd.in/g2nA2HB2 and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4900 posts.
In GMG Insurance Agency v. Margolis Edelstein, No. 213,2023, Supreme Court of Delaware (October 8, 2024) reversed summary judgment in favor of lawyers faced with a claim of professional negligence relating to legal services provided to GMG Insurance Agency.
The Margolis Edelstein (“Margolis”) law firm defended GMG and Howard Wilson, a GMG employee, in a noncompete action brought by Lyons Insurance Agency, Inc. in the Court of Chancery. After GMG failed to prevail fully on its motion for summary judgment in the Court of Chancery, GMG fired Margolis and at the same time also fired Wilson.
On the eve of trial, with GMG represented by new counsel and Wilson represented by separate counsel, Wilson filed an affidavit recanting his prior testimony. Wilson’s new sworn statements were drastically inconsistent with his prior testimony and unfavorable to GMG. GMG, with its defenses obliterated by the perjured statement settled its part of the litigation for $1.2 million.
GMG then sued Margolis. GMG asserted that but for Margolis’s negligent representation in the Court of Chancery, GMG would not have been exposed to the consequences of Wilson’s eleventh-hour change in testimony. The Superior Court granted summary judgment in favor of Margolis.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The Court of Chancery Litigation
Lyons sued Wilson and GMG seeking injunctive relief and money damages. Lyons claimed that Wilson’s employment with GMG breached his non-compete agreement with Lyons, and that GMG aided and abetted that breach and tortiously interfered with the agreement between Lyons and Wilson. GMG retained Margolis to represent itself and Wilson in the Chancery Litigation.
The Court of Chancery granted summary judgment in favor of GMG on all counts except for Lyons’s tortious interference claim. The court also held that Wilson had breached his non-compete agreement with Lyons.
As predicted Wilson filed an affidavit “disavow[ing] and recant[ing] any prior sworn testimony inconsistent with” his new affidavit (the “Wilson Affidavit”). GMG paid $1.2 million to settle the claims against it in the Chancery Litigation.
ANALYSIS
To prevail on a claim of legal malpractice, a plaintiff must establish the following elements: (i) the employment of the attorney; (ii) the attorney’s neglect of a professional obligation; and (iii) resulting loss. Regarding the last element, “the plaintiff must demonstrate that the underlying action would have been successful but for the attorney’s negligence.”
The Supreme Court found Superior Court erred in three ways.
1 granting summary judgment for Margolis because there are disputes of material fact as to whether Margolis’s representation of GMG in the Chancery Litigation breached the standard of care owed by Delaware attorneys.
2 failing to address GMG’s contention that, but for Margolis’s alleged negligence, GMG would have prevailed on all claims in the Chancery Litigation.
3 concluding as a matter of law that the Wilson Affidavit was a superseding cause that broke the causal chain leading to the settlement of the Chancery Litigation.
The Court of Chancery granted summary judgment in favor of GMG. This ruling alone evidences the competence and diligent representation of GMG by Margolis prior to termination.
GMG also contends that Margolis committed malpractice by simultaneously representing GMG and Wilson in the Chancery Litigation despite a potential conflict of interest. Because the factual record and the reasonable inferences to be drawn from it could support a finding in GMG’s favor on its allegations of negligence, the Superior Court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Margolis.
The Superior Court Erred In Concluding That The Wilson Affidavit Was A Superseding Cause As A Matter Of Law.
To break the causal chain and make an intervening cause a superseding one, the intervening act or event itself must have been neither anticipated nor reasonably foreseeable by the original tortfeasor. However, evidence did not show Margolis could reasonably foresee twenty months before the execution of the Wilson Affidavit-that Wilson would perjure himself by changing his prior sworn testimony with the Wilson Affidavit. Therefore, the Supreme Court found the Wilson Affidavit was a superseding cause that broke the causal chain leading to the settlement of the Chancery Litigation.
Margolis is not relieved from liability because it could not foresee the precise event that might lead to, or trigger, the adverse litigation result. It was sufficient that it could foresee that GMG remaining as a defendant in the Chancery Litigation could lead to an unhappy ending.
The Superior Court’s erroneous and reversible conclusion that the Wilson Affidavit was, as a matter of law, a superseding cause of GMG’s damages resulted in the Superior Court’s error in granting Margolis Edelstein’s motion for summary judgment.
Adding to the judgment with a concurring opinion Chief Justice SEITZ noted that Wilson’s pre-affidavit testimony, by itself, was most likely perjury in the Court of Chancery litigation and fraud between the parties to that case. But if GMG then used Wilson’s false testimony to prop up its separate legal malpractice action, it qualifies as a fraud on the court and GMG would be converting fraud between the parties into a fraud on the court. On remand, the Superior Court should decide whether this is the case. If so, GMG’s case should be dismissed as a sanction for its misconduct.
ZALMA OPINION
Lawyers, although they try, are neither perfect nor clairvoyant. Lawyers, judges, and every human will err. The trial judges erred and the plaintiff, GMG, tried to use Wilson’s perjury to possibly create a fraud on the court which attempt could result in a dismissal of the case for its misconduct, the case remaining is ripe for an agreed settlement to avoid a terminating sanction.
(c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe or Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gmmzUVBy
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg
Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
Convicted Criminal Seeks to Compel Receiver to Protect his Assets
Post number 5291
See the video at and at and at https://www.zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
The Work of a Court Appointed Receiver is Constitutionally Protected
In Simon Semaan et al. v. Robert P. Mosier et al., G064385, California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Third Division (February 6, 2026) the Court of Appeals applied the California anti-SLAPP statute which protects defendants from meritless lawsuits arising from constitutionally protected activities, including those performed in official capacities. The court also considered the doctrine of quasi-judicial immunity, which shields court-appointed receivers from liability for discretionary acts performed within their official duties.
Facts
In September 2021, the State of California filed felony charges against Simon Semaan, alleging violations of Insurance Code section 11760(a) for making...
When There are Two Different Other Insurance Clauses They Eliminate Each Other and Both Insurers Owe Indemnity Equally
Post number 5289
In Great West Casualty Co. v. Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Co., and Conserv FS, Inc., and Timothy A. Brennan, as Administrator of the Estate of Pat- rick J. Brennan, deceased, Nos. 24-1258, 24-1259, United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit (February 11, 2026) the USCA was required to resolve a dispute that arose when a tractor-trailer operated by Robert D. Fisher (agent of Deerpass Farms Trucking, LLC-II) was involved in a side-impact collision with an SUV driven by Patrick J. Brennan, resulting in Brennan’s death.
Facts
Deerpass Trucking, an interstate motor carrier, leased the tractor from Deerpass Farms Services, LLC, and hauled cargo for Conserv FS, Inc. under a trailer interchange agreement. The tractor was insured by Great West Casualty Company with a $1 million policy limit, while the trailer was insured by Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Company with a $2 million ...
Opiod Producer Seeks Indemnity from CGL Insurers
Post number 5288
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/guNhStN2, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gYqkk-n3 and at https://lnkd.in/g8U3ehuc, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
Insurers Exclude Damages Due to Insured’s Products
In Matthew Dundon, As The Trustee Of The Endo General Unsecured Creditors’ Trust v. ACE Property And Casualty Insurance Company, et al., Civil Action No. 24-4221, United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania (February 10, 2026) Matthew Dundon, trustee of the Endo General Unsecured Creditors’ Trust, sued multiple commercial general liability (CGL) insurers for coverage of opioid-related litigation involving Endo International PLC a pharmaceutical manufacturer.
KEY FACTS
Beginning as early as 2014, thousands of opioid suits were filed by governments, third parties, and individuals alleging harms tied to opioid manufacturing and marketing.
Bankruptcy & Settlements
Endo filed Chapter 11 in August 2022; before bankruptcy it ...
Passover for Americans
Posted on February 19, 2026 by Barry Zalma
“The Passover Seder For Americans”
For more than 3,000 years Jewish fathers have told the story of the Exodus of the enslaved Jews from Egypt. Telling the story has been required of all Jewish fathers. Americans, who have lived in North America for more than 300 years have become Americans and many have lost the ability to read, write and understand the Hebrew language in which the story of Passover was first told in the Torah. Passover is one of the many holidays Jewish People celebrate to help them remember the importance of G_d in their lives. We see the animals, the oceans, the rivers, the mountains, the rain, sun, the planets, the stars, and the people and wonder how did all these wonderful things come into being. Jews believe the force we call G_d created the entire universe and everything in it. Jews feel G_d is all seeing and knowing and although we can’t see Him, He is everywhere and in everyone.We understand...
Passover for Americans
Posted on February 19, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/passover-americans-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-5vgkc.
“The Passover Seder For Americans”
For more than 3,000 years Jewish fathers have told the story of the Exodus of the enslaved Jews from Egypt. Telling the story has been required of all Jewish fathers. Americans, who have lived in North America for more than 300 years have become Americans and many have lostthe ability to read, write and understand the Hebrew language in which the story of Passover was first told in the Torah.
Passover is one of the many holidays Jewish People celebrate to help them remember the importance of G_d in their lives. We see the animals, the oceans, the rivers, the mountains, the rain, sun, the planets, the stars, and the people and ...
You Get What You Pay For – Less Coverage Means Lower Premium
Post number 5275
Posted on January 30, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the video at and at
When Experts for Both Sides Agree That Two Causes Concur to Cause a Wall to Collapse Exclusion Applies
In Lido Hospitality, Inc. v. AIX Specialty Insurance Company, No. 1-24-1465, 2026 IL App (1st) 241465-U, Court of Appeals of Illinois (January 27, 2026) resolved the effect of an anti-concurrent cause exclusion to a loss with more than one cause.
Facts and Background
Lido Hospitality, Inc. operates the Lido Motel in Franklin Park, Illinois. In November 2020, a windstorm caused one of the motel’s brick veneer walls to collapse. At the time, Lido was insured under a policy issued by AIX Specialty Insurance Company which provided coverage for windstorm damage. However, the policy contained an exclusion for any loss or damage directly or indirectly resulting from ...
