Rusk v. Harstad

¶1 Zachary R.E. Rusk appeals the order granting summary judgment on his legal malpractice complaint. This case is before the court on a sua sponte motion for summary disposition. We affirm.

¶2 The district court ruled that “based upon the undisputed facts, the record does not support a finding that an attorney-client relationship existed between” Rusk and Defendants Kass Harstad or Strindberg & Seholnick LLC (the law film). The district court stated that Harstad and the law firm presented undisputed evidence of communications indicating that the law firm would not represent Rusk, which also…