Legal Malpractice and Representation
of Lawyers and Law Firms
Perhaps the ultimate endorsement of our firm is the fact that knowledgeable attorneys consistently turn to us with their own professional problems, and for aggressive and experienced defense of complex legal malpractice cases. We have defended suits involving clients ranging from solo practitioners to the largest firms in the State of Wisconsin. That experience gives us the resources to handle these often unique, complicated and multi-faceted cases, requiring competence not only in malpractice law, but also in the areas of legal concentration in which such suits arise. Our firm recognizes and understands the emotional and legal concerns of the attorney; we act not just as lawyers, but as counselors. As with our medical malpractice work, our experience in handling legal malpractice cases has given us access to a broad network of legal professionals willing to act as consultants and experts.
Our work representing attorneys extends well beyond handling malpractice claims and includes advising and representing attorneys on firm merger, departure and acquisition issues, fee disputes, disciplinary complaints and reinstatement petitions.
As a result of our work in these areas, we have been substantially involved in the development of Wisconsin law by our appellate courts. In addition to regularly and successfully trying and litigating lawsuits involving these areas at the trial court level, representative appellate experience in these areas include the following:
Schaefer v. Riegelman (Plaintiff’s legal
malpractice complaint found invalidly executed due to failure to have signed
by Wisconsin licensed attorney.)
Markwardt, et al. V. Zurich American Insurance Company (Appropriateness and validity of agreement between attorney and departing associate for division of fees on contingent fee cases taken by departing associate.)
In Re Loew (Affirmation of limited discipline imposed by referee based upon medical disability issues.)
In Re Jacobson (Affirmation of limited discipline imposed in light of medical disablity issues raised by PJM after taking over case following hearing and initial adverse result.)