Oehlerich v. Llewellyn

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the trial court properly granted summary judgment on plaintiffs’ breach of contract claim when it was simply a duplication of his legal malpractice claim
• holding that when allegations of breach of fiduciary duty “clearly call into question the degree of professional skill exercised ... [they] are duplications of ... legal malpractice claim[s].” (internal quotation omitted)
• holding that the trial court properly granted summary judgment on plaintiffs’ breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty claims when they were simply a duplication of his legal malpractice claim
• affirming summary judgment as to the plaintiff’s claim for breach of fiduciary duty, which called into question the degree of professional skill exercised by the defendant attorney and therefore merely duplicated the plaintiff’s unsupported claim for legal malpractice
• affirming summary judgment as to the plaintiff’s claim for breach of fiduciary duty, which called into question the degree of professional skill exercised by the defendant attorney and therefore merely duplicated the plaintiff’s unsupported claim for legal malpractice
• “ ‘Affidavits supporting and opposing summary judgment must be made on personal knowledge and must set forth such facts as would be admissible in the evidence.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).