A lawyer’s legal malpractice suit against her divorce attorneys alleging breach of contract actually sounded in tort and therefore was not timely filed, the Pennsylvania Superior Court has ruled, upholding a Philadelphia trial judge’s decision that had expressly anticipated the possibility of reversal on appeal.

In Michelle Seidner’s lawsuit against her former counsel, the law firm of Bock and Finkelman and principal Howard Finkelman, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Robert P. Coleman found in favor of Finkelman. In an October 2016 ruling, Coleman said the four-year statute of limitations for breach of contract actions could not be applied to Seidner’s complaint. Instead, according to the judge, the suit was subject to the two-year statute of limitations governing tort claims.

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

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]