3d DCA Watch -- One Thing Leads to Another Edition!

Hi kids, this week the Bunkerites elected to issue a few written utterances!

It's almost as if a group of decision-makers thought through a legal issue and then decided to write their thoughts down so others could review their thoughts, and perhaps be guided in future cases by them, or potentially distinguish some future situation from a past situation if the facts or law are somewhat different.

Imagine that!

REWJB v. Bombardier:

Lauri Waldham Ross puts another notch in her belt.

Forbes v. Lehner Law:

Statute of limitations defense does not bar clawback suit against lawyer.

Sweetapple v. Simmons:

More lawyer legal cases -- this time involving whether trust account wire receipts are privileged.

Not surprisingly, they are not:
The issue presented is whether the trust account wire receipts are protected by the attorney-client privilege. Because this financial information is not privileged in the hands of the client, it is not privileged in the hands of the attorney.
Ok, here's a case where an opinion may not have been necessary.

It's Schnebly Time!


  1. What about props to Mike Schlessinger taking on the big boyzz. Got the Third DCA to say claw back.

  2. "Statute of limitations defense does not bar clawback suit against lawyer." This statement does not reflect the holding. The court only pointed out the obvious: you cannot move to dismiss on a SOL theory unless the defense is set forth in the complaint. Otherwise plead it as an affirmative defense. Simply a procedural ruling. All Lisa needs to do is file a motion for summary judgment. Eig will grant it and the 3d will do what it does so well: pull out the PCA stamp.

  3. Thanks for the contribution, STL.

  4. I reread the order based on STL's sage comment, and it's true -- all that happened here is the complaint attempted to plead around the SOL, and evidently succeeded. Whether that will hold up down the road is another story.


Post a Comment