 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Ferguson v. Neiman3/27/2002
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott Rosenberg, Judge.
William and Dolores Ferguson appeal from the district court's ruling granting the defendant law firm's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the Fergusons' legal malpractice action. AFFIRMED.
William and Dolores Ferguson appeal from the district court's ruling granting the defendant law firm's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the Ferguson's legal malpractice action against defendant Neiman, Stone, McCormick & Wendl law firm. The Fergusons claim that the alleged extra-judicial admissions made by defendant law firm's attorney provided substantial evidence, without expert testimony, to support a finding of professional negligence. We affirm.
Background Facts and Proceedings.
William and Dolores Ferguson owned a furniture polish manufacturing business known as C.W. Parker Company in Des Moines. In December 1988 the Fergusons entered into a contract for the sale of their business to Carmine Piscopo, Joy Piscopo and John Rand. These individuals formed a partnership, Phoenix Associates, to purchase the company's real estate . The individuals also formed Phoenix Distributors to purchase the business assets. A written contract provided Phoenix Distributors was to pay on an installment basis $140,000 for the business assets with the Fergusons having a security interest. A separate real estate contract involved Phoenix Associates' purchase of the business real estate for a total price of $165,000 on an installment basis. The purchasers were also to pay the Fergusons royalties of two percent on the net sales of the polish produced by the business under any formula owned by the Fergusons. The purchasers were also required to pay on an installment basis $110,000 to the Fergusons for a restrictive covenant not to compete with the purchasers. The individual purchasers gave personal guarantees on both contracts. At the time of the sale, the purchasers gave a financial statement indicating their combined net worth of $1,324,000. The business sale contract and the real estate contract had cross-default provisions. The purchase agreement also provided that the Fergusons could repurchase the stock in the business.
In July 1990 the purchasers sought to renegotiate the agreement because they could no longer make payments. They offered the company back to the Fergusons, who rejected the offer. The purchasers threatened to file bankruptcy if the contracts were not renegotiated. The purchasers wanted to defer payments on the royalties and defer payments on the covenant not to compete. The Fergusons did not take any action to enforce the personal guarantees at that time.
In August 1991 the Fergusons agreed to defer payment on the restrictive covenant. They also agreed to defer payments on the royalties without obtaining any financial information from the purchasers. They further agreed to subordinate their security rights to a bank on its loan to the purchasers. The purchasers' documentation to the bank indicated that they had an ownership interest in another company. In July 1992 the purchasers again indicated that they were having difficulties making the payments. By October 1992 the purchasers indicated to the Fergusons that they would seek bankruptcy protection unless the Fergusons agreed to further modification of the contracts.
Following this communication, the Fergusons consulted with John Neiman of Neiman, Stone, McCormick & Wendl to evaluate the situation and advise them on how to collect their money. Neiman agreed to represent them after indicating that he could not guarantee full recovery under the contracts. Neiman received
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Iowa Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|