MB Industries, LLC v. CNA Insurance Co.
52 So. 3d 168
La. Ct. App.2010Background
- MBI manufactures blast-resistant buildings and acquired assets from Moon Ventures LLC amid Moon's bankruptcy.
- MBI sued Massey, Lavergne, and J. Bass, LLC in 2000 for breach of noncompetition, trade secrets misappropriation, unfair trade practices, and conversion.
- Durio and Weinstein represented MBI at various times; Weinstein withdrew before/during the 2003 bench trial.
- The underlying trial (Nov 2003) resulted in a ruling against MBI.
- MBI sued its former attorneys in 2004 for legal malpractice, alleging pre-trial negligent acts affected the outcome and discovery failures.
- In Aug 2009 the trial court granted summary judgment for Durio/Weinstein; MBI appealed, challenging the scope and merits of the ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether summary judgment was proper on all malpractice claims | MBI argues genuine issues of material fact exist | Durio/Weinstein contend only certain acts were at issue | No; court found issues insufficient to defeat summary judgment on all claims |
| Equitable estoppel and appeal necessity in malpractice suit | Equitable estoppel should bar appeal requirement; could proceed despite no appeal | Client must appeal underlying decision to pursue malpractice claim | Equitable estoppel not a bar; issues fact-bound and remand allowed |
| Whether expert testimony was required to prove standard of care | MBI could prove malpractice without experts given straightforward facts | Some cases require expert testimony to establish standard of care | Expert testimony not always required; jury can evaluate negligence from record |
| Merit of underlying litigation and causation of loss | Underlying case had merit; malpractice caused losses | Underlying merit uncertain; causation disputed | Question of fact remains whether underlying merits were precluded by attorney acts |
Key Cases Cited
- Power Marketing Direct, Inc. v. Foster, 938 So.2d 662 (La. 2006) (summary judgment standard applied on negligence claims)
- La. Safety Ass'n of Timbermen Self-Insurers Fund v. La. Ins. Guar. Ass'n, 17 So.3d 350 (La. 2009) (guides de novo review of summary judgment and burden on movant)
- Murphy v. Gilsbar, Inc., 834 So.2d 669 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2002) (equitable estoppel in legal malpractice context)
- American Reliable Insurance Co. v. Navratil, 445 F.3d 402 (5th Cir. 2006) (settlement not per se bar to malpractice claim; duty to mitigate damages)
- Couture v. Guillory, 713 So.2d 528 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1998) (client may pursue malpractice claims despite partial settlement)
- Frisard v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 979 So.2d 494 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2007) (expert testimony not always required to prove negligence)
- Teague v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 974 So.2d 1266 (La. 2008) (standard of care for attorneys in community context)
- Costello v. Hardy, 864 So.2d 129 (La. 2004) (prerequisite elements for legal malpractice claim)
- Morgan v. Simon, 780 So.2d 626 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2001) (ownership of rights in underlying claim vs. malpractice claim)