· 6/25/1991
Skarbrevik v. Cohen, England & Whitfield
Citations
- 231 Cal. App. 3d 692
- 282 Cal. Rptr. 627
- 91 Daily Journal DAR 7563
- 91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4940
- 1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 716
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding that an attorney could not be sued for professional negligence by a third-party to whom the attorney owed no duty of care
- concluding an attorney representing a corporation had no duty to a minority shareholder because the minority shareholder’s interests were at least potentially adverse to the client the attorney was advising
- applying Doctors’ Co. to reverse a verdict against an attorney where the facts at trial established that the attorney received no more than ordinary fees for legal work performed for the client company
- strong public policy in maintaining and enforcing fidelity and duty of attorney toward client militates against imposing duty to nonclients
- “An attorney generally will not be held liable to a third person not in privity of contract with him since he owes no duty to anyone other than his client.”
- corporate counsel is not the attorney of the corporation’s stockholders merely because his or her actions benefit the stockholders
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Epstein
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.