Legal Opinion
Gilchrist v. Perl
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided May 16, 1986No. C8-84-2152, CX-85-1935 and C1-85-1936PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SIMONETT, Justice.
In these two cases consolidated on appeal, an attorney breached a fiduciary duty to his clients in negotiating their similar personal injury claims. The breach constituted constructive rather than actual fraud and the clients sustained no loss. The issues presented are: whether the attorney should forfeit his fees in their entirety to the clients and such damages be trebled; whether a class action by the clients is appropriate; and whether the plaintiff class can also recover its attorney fees from defendants.
The defendants in both cases are attorney Norman Perl and his…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Hill v. Okay Const. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Melina v. ChaplinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Rice v. PerlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- John C. Frank, Plaintiff-Cross v. Victoria BloomCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1980
- Perez v. PappasWashington Supreme Court · 1983
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Burrow v. ArceTexas Supreme Court · 1999
- Paul Handeen v. Gregory A. Lemaire Henry Lemaire Patricia Lemaire, Orlins & Brainerd Law Firm Richard K. Brainerd Peter I. OrlinsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1997
- L & H AIRCO, INC. v. Rapistan Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Arce v. Burrow, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1998
- Anne P. Hendry v. Francis J. Pelland and Sadur, Pelland & Rubinstein, P.C.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1996
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.