A New Jersey appeals court’s September 2014 holding that lawyers must thoroughly counsel even sophisticated clients on deal-making will remain the law going forward since the state Supreme Court declined last month to hear the case—and transactional attorneys say they’ve taken heed.
The case is Cottone v. Fox Rothschild, in which the Appellate Division found a duty, as a matter of law, to explain contract terms, even if they’re unambiguous and the client personally negotiated them. In the process, the court reinstated a legal malpractice suit against Fox Rothschild, which is now on remand.
This content has been archived.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]
