Felty v. Hartweg

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that corporation’s attorney did not have fiduciary duty to a minority shai’eholder where there was no express agreement that the minority shareholder was to be a beneficiary of the contract between the attorney and corporation
• declining to recognize corporate attorney’s duty to shareholders, court observed that “[e]ven in closely held corporations, minority shareholders often have conflicting interests with the corporation”
• shareholder in ordinary corporation does not become a beneficiary of the attorney/client relationship between lawyer and corporation and lawyer for corporation does not owe fiduciary duty to shareholder
• “An attorney can be liable for malpractice only to one to whom the attorney has a duty.”
• “The allegation that [the defendant attorney] should have known he was expected to protect the minority shareholders is an allegation which places upon him a duty not imposed by law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).