Legal Opinion
Vahila v. Hall
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided February 12, 1997No. 1995-2196PublishedCited by 143 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 77 Ohio St.3d 421.] VAHILA ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. HALL ET AL., APPELLEES. [Cite as Vahila v. Hall,
1997-Ohio-259.] Torts—Legal malpractice—Requirements to establish cause of action for legal malpractice based on negligent representation. To establish a cause of action for legal malpractice based on negligent representation, a plaintiff must show (1) that the attorney owed a duty or obligation to the plaintiff, (2) that there was a breach of that duty or obligation and that the attorney failed to conform to the standard required by…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Dresher v. BurtOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
- Mitseff v. WheelerOhio Supreme Court · 1988
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by143 opinions
- Dodd v. CroskeyOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
- Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. HansenOhio Court of Appeals · 2011
- Horak v. Nationwide Ins. Co., Ca 23327 (7-25-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
- Laasalle Bank National Associationm v. Street, 08 Ca 60 (4-17-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
- Williams v. GlousterOhio Court of Appeals · 2012
138 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.