<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Lawyers USA Online &#187; legal malpractice</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/tag/legal-malpractice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com</link>
	<description>Your Business Partner</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 20:49:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Law firm could be sued outside home state&#160;</title>
		<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/05/01/law-firm-could-be-sued-outside-home-state/</link>
		<comments>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/05/01/law-firm-could-be-sued-outside-home-state/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 19:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pat Murphy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business and Civil Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury and Tort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Your Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[long-arm jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal jurisdiction]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersusaonline.com/?p=92582</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A Connecticut law firm could be sued in Arizona state court based on its alleged negligence in analyzing the legality of a tax shelter considered by an Arizona client, the Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled in reversing a dismissal.</p> <p>The plaintiff is an Arizona resident. Before investing in a <br /><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/05/01/law-firm-could-be-sued-outside-home-state/">&#187; Continue Reading.</a></br></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/05/01/law-firm-could-be-sued-outside-home-state/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Benchmarks: Connecticut law firm could be sued in Arizona&#160;</title>
		<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/04/30/benchmarks-connecticut-law-firm-could-be-sued-in-arizona/</link>
		<comments>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/04/30/benchmarks-connecticut-law-firm-could-be-sued-in-arizona/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 15:14:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pat Murphy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business and Civil Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury and Tort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Your Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[long-arm jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal jurisdiction]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersusaonline.com/?p=92565</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A Connecticut law firm subjected itself to being sued in Arizona courts when it accepted a $50,000 fee for issuing an opinion letter supporting a tax shelter being considered by an Arizona resident.</p> <p>That’s what the Arizona Court of Appeals decided last week in reversing the dismissal of a fraud <br /><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/04/30/benchmarks-connecticut-law-firm-could-be-sued-in-arizona/">&#187; Continue Reading.</a></br></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/04/30/benchmarks-connecticut-law-firm-could-be-sued-in-arizona/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Law firm forfeited malpractice coverage&#160;</title>
		<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/04/08/law-firm-forfeited-malpractice-coverage/</link>
		<comments>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/04/08/law-firm-forfeited-malpractice-coverage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2013 16:59:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pat Murphy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury and Tort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Your Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malpractice insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[notice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersusaonline.com/?p=92263</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A law firm failed to provide the notice necessary to ensure coverage of a legal malpractice claim under its professional liability policy, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in affirming a summary judgment.</p> <p>The firm represented a potential buyer of a drugstore.  The buyer and seller executed <br /><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/04/08/law-firm-forfeited-malpractice-coverage/">&#187; Continue Reading.</a></br></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/04/08/law-firm-forfeited-malpractice-coverage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Legal malpractice claim may be assigned&#160;</title>
		<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/21/legal-malpractice-claim-may-be-assigned/</link>
		<comments>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/21/legal-malpractice-claim-may-be-assigned/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:32:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pat Murphy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business and Civil Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Your Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[assignment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersusaonline.com/?p=92016</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A legal malpractice claim arising from a mortgage refinancing could be assigned pursuant to a subrogation clause in favor of the title insurer, the Georgia Supreme Court has ruled in affirming judgment.</p> <p>The defendant acted as the closing attorney in a mortgage refinancing in which the lender supplied funds to <br /><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/21/legal-malpractice-claim-may-be-assigned/">&#187; Continue Reading.</a></br></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/21/legal-malpractice-claim-may-be-assigned/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Estate can’t sue lawyer for negligent tax planning&#160;</title>
		<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/13/estate-cant-sue-lawyer-for-negligent-tax-planning/</link>
		<comments>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/13/estate-cant-sue-lawyer-for-negligent-tax-planning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:20:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pat Murphy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business and Civil Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Your Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[estate planning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersusaonline.com/?p=91881</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The administrator of a client’s estate could not maintain a legal malpractice action for alleged negligent estate planning that resulted in increased tax liability, the Kansas Supreme Court has ruled in affirming judgment.</p> <p>The defendant provided estate planning services for a wealthy client. The defendant’s asset protection strategy consisted of <br /><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/13/estate-cant-sue-lawyer-for-negligent-tax-planning/">&#187; Continue Reading.</a></br></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/13/estate-cant-sue-lawyer-for-negligent-tax-planning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Statutory beneficiary can sue for legal malpractice&#160;</title>
		<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/13/statutory-beneficiary-can-sue-for-legal-malpractice/</link>
		<comments>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/13/statutory-beneficiary-can-sue-for-legal-malpractice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:13:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pat Murphy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury and Tort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Your Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wrongful death]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersusaonline.com/?p=91877</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A wrongful death statutory beneficiary could pursue a malpractice claim against the lawyer for the personal representative of the wrongful death estate, the New Mexico Supreme Court has ruled in reversing a summary judgment.</p> <p>The plaintiff’s ex-wife was injured when her car was struck from behind. The couple’s daughter was <br /><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/13/statutory-beneficiary-can-sue-for-legal-malpractice/">&#187; Continue Reading.</a></br></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/03/13/statutory-beneficiary-can-sue-for-legal-malpractice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LEGAL MALPRACTICE&#160;</title>
		<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/20/legal-malpractice-15/</link>
		<comments>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/20/legal-malpractice-15/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:37:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pat Murphy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersusaonline.com/?p=91477</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>State courts have jurisdiction to hear a legal malpractice action involving the alleged mishandling of a federal patent matter.</p> <p>See “<a title="State can could hear patent-related malpractice suit" href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/20/state-courts-can-hear-patent-related-malpractice-suit/"><strong>State courts can hear patent-related malpractice suit</strong></a>”</p> <p><em>U.S. Supreme Court.<strong> <a title="Gunn v. Minton" href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/wp-files/pdfs-5/gunn-v-minton.pdf">Gunn v. Minton</a></strong>, No. 11-1118. Feb. 20, 2013. <br /><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/20/legal-malpractice-15/">&#187; Continue Reading.</a></br></em></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/20/legal-malpractice-15/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>State courts can hear patent-related malpractice suit&#160;</title>
		<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/20/state-courts-can-hear-patent-related-malpractice-suit/</link>
		<comments>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/20/state-courts-can-hear-patent-related-malpractice-suit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:33:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pat Murphy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business and Civil Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DC News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News from the Capitol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Your Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersusaonline.com/?p=91475</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>State courts have jurisdiction to hear a legal malpractice action involving the alleged mishandling of a federal patent matter, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled.</p> <p>The decision reverses a ruling by the Texas Supreme Court. (See “<a title="Federal court must hear malpractice suit" href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2011/12/27/federal-court-must-hear-malpractice-claim/"><strong>Federal court must hear malpractice claim</strong></a>,” Lawyers <br /><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/20/state-courts-can-hear-patent-related-malpractice-suit/">&#187; Continue Reading.</a></br></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/20/state-courts-can-hear-patent-related-malpractice-suit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lawyer loses license over real estate practices&#160;</title>
		<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/11/lawyer-loses-license-over-real-estate-practices/</link>
		<comments>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/11/lawyer-loses-license-over-real-estate-practices/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2013 20:43:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Vieth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business and Civil Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Your Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attorney discipline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[real estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trust accounts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersusaonline.com/?p=91242</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A Richmond, Va. lawyer who had a high-volume real estate practice has surrendered his law license after the state bar found long-time lapses in bookkeeping and registration as a settlement agent.</p> <p>G. Dean Foster borrowed money to cover errors in his trust account that at one time totaled $176,000, according <br /><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/11/lawyer-loses-license-over-real-estate-practices/">&#187; Continue Reading.</a></br></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/11/lawyer-loses-license-over-real-estate-practices/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Attorney didn’t have duty to expedite client’s new will&#160;</title>
		<link>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/11/attorney-didnt-have-duty-to-expedite-clients-new-will/</link>
		<comments>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/11/attorney-didnt-have-duty-to-expedite-clients-new-will/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:08:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pat Murphy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business and Civil Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Your Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wills and trusts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawyersusaonline.com/?p=91235</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/files/2011/07/last-will-and-testament.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-79421" title="last-will-and-testament" src="http://lawyersusaonline.com/files/2011/07/last-will-and-testament.jpg" alt="" width="200" height="133" /></a>An attorney had no liability for failing to have a revised will executed before his client’s death, the Washington Court of Appeals has ruled in affirming judgment.</p> <p>The defendant provided estate planning services to a client who suffered from terminal <br /><a href="http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/11/attorney-didnt-have-duty-to-expedite-clients-new-will/">&#187; Continue Reading.</a></br></img></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawyersusaonline.com/blog/2013/02/11/attorney-didnt-have-duty-to-expedite-clients-new-will/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
