McCamish, Martin, Brown & Loeffler v. F.E. Appling Interests

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that nonclient could sue attorney for negligent misrepresentation without regard to nonclient's lack of privity with attorney
• holding that privity limits an attorney = s liability to those in privity with the attorney
• holding that trust beneficiaries may sue a lawyer for negligent misrepresentations made to the trust beneficiaries even though no attorney-client relationship exists
• holding that trust beneficiaries may sue a lawyer for negligent misrepresentations made to the trust beneficiaries even though no attorney-client relationship exists
• holding that adoption of section 552 of the Restatement does not threaten lawyers with almost unlimited liability, because it applies to a narrow class of potential claimants and requires that any claimant justifiably rely on the alleged negligent misrepresentation
• holding that privity limits an attorney’s liability to those in privity with the attorney

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).