Baxt v. Liloia
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Opinion of the CourtPoritz, C.J.
In this appeal, plaintiffs have asked the Court to recognize a new cause of action premised upon a breach of the Rules of Professional Conduct (“RPCs” or “Rules”) adopted by the Court for the governance of the legal profession. More specifically, plaintiffs urge us to permit this new claim to be brought against attorneys who represent an adversary of the claimant. A majority of the Appellate Division declined to sanction lawsuits “based solely on an allegation that the conduct of the[] defendants violated the Rules of Professional Conduct.” 284 N.J.Super. 221, 223, 664 A.2d 948 (1995) (Baxt…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Manalapan Realty v. Township Committee of the Township of ManalapanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1995
- In Re WilsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
- Hizey v. CarpenterWashington Supreme Court · 1992
- Mozzochi v. BeckSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Kernan v. One Washington Park Urban Renewal AssociatesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1998
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Banco Popular North America v. GandiSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2005
- LoBiondo v. SchwartzSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2009
- Pryzbowksi v. U.S. Healthcare, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
- Green v. Morgan PropertiesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2013
- Brundage v. Estate of CarambioSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2008
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.