Legal Opinion

Ball v. Birch, Horton, Bittner and Cherot

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided September 27, 2002No. S-10015PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EASTAUGH, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

A law firm’s clients sued the firm. They claimed, among other things, that the firm was negligent in negotiating a commercial transaction and preparing transactional documents. The law firm moved for complete summary judgment; it submitted in support an expert’s report that addressed only the document-preparation claim. When the plaintiffs repeatedly failed to produce expert opinions to oppose the firm’s summary judgment motion or support their malpractice claims, the superior court granted the firm complete summary judgment. We discern no error as to…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Concerned Citizens of South Kenai Peninsula v. Kenai Peninsula BoroughAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Howarth v. First National Bank of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Bohna v. HUGHES, THORSNESS, GANTZAlaska Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Burford v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1973

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. Teck Cominco Alaska Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Parker v. TomeraAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Fletcher v. South Peninsula HospitalAlaska Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Maines v. Kenworth Alaska, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Hymes v. DeramusAlaska Supreme Court · 2005

7 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