Meyer & Anna Prentis Family Foundation, Inc. v. Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the defendant law firm had a fiduciary duty to act on its client’s behalf and not that of its client’s adversary
• recognizing that “the placement of trust, confidence, and reliance must be reasonable, and placement is unreasonable if the interests of the client and nonclient are adverse or even potentially adverse”
• noting that \a trial court has unrestricted discretion to review its previous decision\ absent an appellate court's prior holding to the contrary
• noting that “a trial court has unrestricted discretion to review its previous decision” absent an appellate court's prior holding to the contrary
• noting that “a trial court has unrestricted discretion to review its previous decision” absent an appellate court’s prior holding to the contrary
• observing that “the placement of trust, confidence, and reliance must be reasonable, and placement is unreasonable if the interests of the client and nonclient are adverse or even potentially adverse.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).