Legal Opinion

Atlanta International Insurance v. Bell

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 18, 1991No. Docket 87914; Calendar 6PublishedCited by 87 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrickley, J.

This case presents an issue of first impression: whether defense counsel retained by an insurance company to defend its insured can be held answerable to the insurer for professional malpractice. The Court of Appeals held that defense counsel may not be sued by the insurer for malpractice.

We agree with the analysis of the dissent articulated in section (i)(b) that principles of common-law negligence do not generally require imposition of third-party liability in the malpractice context. We *516also agree with the dissent that something less than a plenary attorney-client relationship exists…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Savings Bank v. WardSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  2. Friedman v. DozorcMichigan Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Commercial Union Insurance v. Medical Protective Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Solo v. Chrysler Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1980
  5. Atlanta International Insurance v. BellMichigan Court of Appeals · 1989

3Cited by87 opinions

  1. In Re Air Crash Disaster.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
  2. American Centennial Insurance Co. v. Canal Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Shaya B. Pacific, LLC v. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLPAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  4. Admiral Insurance v. Columbia Casualty InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1992
  5. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. TraverTexas Supreme Court · 1998

82 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