Legal Opinion

Mayol v. Summers, Watson & Kimpel

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided January 16, 1992No. 4-90-0697PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Steigmann

Plaintiff, Kenneth E. Mayol, sued defendants Philip Summers and Raymond H. Kimpel (in their individual capacities) and Summers, Watson & Kimpel (a partnership) seeking damages for legal malpractice. Defendant Kimpel counterclaimed for fees Mayol allegedly owed him for prosecuting an appeal on behalf of Mayol. A jury returned a verdict in favor of Mayol on his legal malpractice claim, awarded damages of $700,000, and also returned a verdict in favor of Mayol on Kimpel’s counterclaim. On appeal, defendants challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict and the damages…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Pedrick v. Peoria & Eastern RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Bullard v. BarnesIllinois Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Rogers v. Robson, Masters, Ryan, Brumund and BelomAppellate Court of Illinois · 1979
  4. Chance v. City of CollinsvilleAppellate Court of Illinois · 1983
  5. Rogers v. ROBSON, MASTERS, RYANIllinois Supreme Court · 1980

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Hizey v. CarpenterWashington Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Pasquale v. Ohio Power Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Lundquist v. NickelsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1992
  4. Lay v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Guy v. SteurerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1992

10 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