Legal Opinion
Guy v. Liederbach
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided April 29, 1983No. 80-3-802PublishedCited by 312 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
HUTCHINSON, Justice:
This case, one of first impression for us, presents the question of whether a named beneficiary of a will who is also named executrix has a cause of action against the attorney who drafted the will and directed her to witness it where the fact that she witnessed the will voided her entire legacy and her appointment as executrix. Common Pleas Court dismissed appellee’s suit, relying on Lawall v. Groman, 180 Pa. 532, 37 A. 98 (1897), and two Federal cases1 which found Pennsylvania to be a “strict privity” state requiring an attorney-client relationship to…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Ultramares Corp. v. ToucheNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Biakanja v. IrvingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Lucas v. HammCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- Goodman v. KennedyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Virginia J. Barry Melville v. American Home Assurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by312 opinions
- Eisenberg v. GagnonCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- Scarpitti v. WeborgSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Flaherty v. WeinbergCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
- Barcelo v. ElliottTexas Supreme Court · 1996
- Hess v. Fox Rothschild, LLPSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
307 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.