Legal Opinion

Pence v. Slate

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided April 11, 2019No. Appeal No. 2018AP652Published

1Opinion of the CourtLundsten, P.J.

¶1 Wisconsin has a long-standing rule that an attorney is not liable to a non-client for "acts committed in the exercise of his [or her] duties as an attorney." See Auric v. Continental Cas. Co. , 111 Wis. 2d 507, 512, 331 N.W.2d 325 (1983). There are exceptions to this rule and one of those exceptions, established in Auric , applies in the estate-planning context.

¶2 In this case, beneficiaries of a trust seek to hold an attorney liable for his alleged negligence related to the trust, despite the fact that the beneficiaries were never clients of the attorney. They rely on the Auric exception.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Green Spring Farms v. KerstenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Kraemer Bros. v. United States Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Auric v. Continental Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Hatleberg v. Norwest Bank WisconsinWisconsin Supreme Court · 2005
  5. D. Clifford Crummey v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1968

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API