Estate of Schneider v. Finmann

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a nonclient estate could maintain a malpractice claim against the estate-planning attorney
• holding that only the client and the client's estate may sue a drafter of testamentary documents for legal malpractice
• holding that the personal representative has sufficient privity with a decedent’s attorney to maintain a legal-malpractice action for damages resulting from negligent estate planning, which allegedly caused en hanced estate-tax liability
• noting that only minority of jurisdictions apply strict privity rule in estate plan- ning contexts
• noting that a decedent's estate \stands in the shoes of the decedent\
• \Relaxing privity to permit third parties to commence professional negligence actions against estate planning attorneys would produce undesirable results- uncertainty and limitless liability.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).