Legal Opinion

Radovich v. Locke-Paddon

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 8, 1995No. H012054PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BAMATTRE-MANOUKIAN, J.

Plaintiff Rafael Radovich appeals from a judgment, for defendants William F. Locke-Paddon (an attorney) and the law firm by which Locke-Paddon was employed, based on summary adjudication of issues in consolidated civil actions. The trial court was called upon to answer two questions of law:(1) Did Locke-Paddon or the law firm, in preparing a will for a client who died without executing the will, owe a duty of care to Radovich as a potential beneficiary named in the unsigned will? The trial court answered that they did not.(2) Were any claims Radovich may have had…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. Dillon v. LeggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Biakanja v. IrvingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Lucas v. HammCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Neel v. Magana, Olney, Levy, Cathcart & GelfandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Bily v. Arthur Young & Co.California Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Samuels v. MixCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Marshall v. Gibson, Dunn & CrutcherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  3. Wilkins v. National Broadcasting Co.California Court of Appeal · 1999
  4. Est. of Robert H. Agnew v. Ross, D.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  5. Jocer Enterprises, Inc. v. PriceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010

25 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