Legal Opinion

Wozniak & Padula, P.C. v. Gilmore, Rees, Carlson & Cataldo, P.C.

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided April 8, 2005PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWelsh, J.

This action arises out of a dispute between two law firms as to whether the defendant firm, Gilmore, Rees, Carlson & Cataldo, P.C. (“Gilmore”), had a duty to account for and to reimburse the plaintiff firm, Wozniak and Padula, P.C. (“Wozniak”), for its fees and expenses for legal work done in a personal injury case.

Lisa Couch (“Couch”) initially retained Wozniak to represent her in a personal injury claim resulting from an automobile accident on October 23, 2001; she signed a contingent-fee agreement about a week after the accident. Wozniak continued to represent Couch until March 19,2003, at…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Nader v. CitronMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
  3. Ayash v. Dana-Farber Cancer InstituteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2005
  4. Salamon v. TerraMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
  5. Tetrault v. MahoneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Walsh v. Town of RandolphMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2005
  2. Trustees of Hunters Village Condominium Trust v. GerkeMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API