Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Est. of Robert H. Agnew v. Ross, D.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 19, 2017No. 76 MAP 2015Published

1ConcurrenceChief Justice Saylor

I agree with the majority’s holding that, to maintain standing in an action against an attorney for breach of contract in failing to perfect documents to reflect a client’s testamentary intentions, intended third party beneficiaries must be identified in an executed estate planning document. In this regard, I am persuaded by the public policy rationale expressed by the majority.1 My main reservation with its opinion, however, is *51that I am not convinced by some of the additional rationale upon which the majority relies.2

As a final observation, to the degree that some ambiguity may attend the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Guy v. LiederbachSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Radovich v. Locke-PaddonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  3. In re Estate of FieldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API