Skip to main content
· 1/10/1992

Goldstein v. Kaestner

Citations

  • 413 S.E.2d 347
  • 243 Va. 169
  • 8 Va. Law Rep. 1875
  • 1992 Va. LEXIS 145

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that even though there was a change in ownership of supermarket, the day-to-day operations remained the same, so lost profits were recoverable
  • holding the appropriate standard of review in a malpractice action where a timely appeal is not filed
  • appropriate standard of review in legal malpractice cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Keenan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.