A New Jersey appeals court has reinstated a legal malpractice suit against Fox Rothschild, finding, as a matter of law, that attorneys have a duty of care to explain the terms of an agreement to clients, even if those terms are unambiguous and the client is a sophisticated businessperson who personally negotiated those terms.
The Sept. 2 decision in Cottone v. Fox Rothschild reversed a ruling by a Bergen County judge who dismissed the case on summary judgment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
