Legal Opinion
Biomet Inc. v. Finnegan Henderson LLP
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided March 19, 2009No. 07-CV-813PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WASHINGTON, Chief Judge:
Biomet Inc. (“Biomet”) appeals from the grant of summary judgment in favor of Finnegan Henderson LLP (“Finnegan”) by the trial court. Below, the trial court found that, as a matter of law, Finnegan could not be held liable for legal malpractice in this case and granted summary judgment. The trial court set forth two basic grounds for its grant of summary judgment: (1) that the constitutional issue that the Federal Circuit deemed waived was not preserved in the post-trial motions, and Finnegan was not responsible for the post-trial motions, and (2) that Finnegan could…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- BMW of North America, Inc. v. GoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Smith v. MurraySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Regional Rail Reorganization Act CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. HaslipSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Texas v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Pietrangelo v. Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr, LLPDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
- Seed Co. v. Westerman Ex Rel. Estate of WestermanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2016
- Hickey v. ScottDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- Lewis v. United StatesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Johnson v. SullivanDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.