Legal Opinion
Paul S. Damron v. Vern Herzog, Jr.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 26, 1995No. 94-35043PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KELLEHER, District Judge:
The Idaho District Court held that the state of Idaho does not recognize a general duty of care owed by attorneys to former clients. Accordingly, the district court granted Herzog’s motion for summary judgment. Damron appeals. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we reverse and remand to the Idaho District Court for trial.
FACTS
In 1982 Plaintiff-Appellant Paul Damron (Damron) hired Defendant-Appellee Vern Herzog (Herzog) to prepare documents for the sale of Damron’s funeral and cemetery business to Richard, Patricia, Wayne, and Marie Wheatley…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Salve Regina College v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Jeanette Jesinger v. Nevada Federal Credit Union, a Federally-Chartered Credit Union Robert W. FleischmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Woods v. City Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- T. C. Theatre Corp. v. Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1953
- Flatt v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Robert A. McClure v. Frank ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Kilpatrick v. Wiley, Rein & FieldingUtah Supreme Court · 2001
- Bevan Ex Rel. Bevan v. FixWyoming Supreme Court · 2002
- In Re the Rules of Professional ConductMontana Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. JonesMontana Supreme Court · 1996
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.