 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Eck v. Godbout7/21/2005
Suffolk.
May 3, 2005.
Present: Marshall, C.J., Greaney, Ireland, Spina, Sosman, & Cordy, JJ.
Attorney at Law, Malpractice. Release. Negligence, Attorney at law.
The case was heard by Ernest B. Murphy, J., on a motion for summary judgment.
After review by the Appeals Court, the Supreme Judicial Court granted leave to obtain further appellate review.
As a defense to a claim alleging legal malpractice, the defendant Lawrence A. Kellem contended that the claim was barred by a release that the plaintiff David W. Eck had executed in his favor in settlement of an earlier malpractice case. A judge in the Superior Court agreed, and entered summary judgment in favor of Kellem. In an unpublished memorandum and order pursuant to its rule 1:28, the Appeals Court reversed, concluding that, in light of Leblanc v. Friedman, 438 Mass. 592 (2003), the reference in the release to the litigation being settled operated to limit the scope of the release to the claims in that specific litigation. Eck v. Godbout, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 1112 (2004). We granted Kellem's application for further appellate review, limited to the issue of the release. For the following reasons, we hold that the broad language of the release encompassed Eck's present claim against Kellem, and therefore affirm the entry of summary judgment in favor of Kellem.
1. Facts and Procedural Background
Over a period of years, attorney Kellem represented Eck in various real estate transactions. In 1985, Eck sold real estate in Norwood to one Stephen Bisson. Kellem represented Eck in that matter, and drafted the purchase and sale agreement that governed the transaction. At the time, Eck was concerned about his potential liability for hazardous waste on the property, and asked Kellem to include in the agreement a provision that would protect him from future claims by Bisson with respect to any such hazardous waste. Kellem assured Eck that the agreement contained language that would so protect him.
The following year, Kellem represented Eck in connection with a separate transaction involving real estate in Hull. Two years later, Eck sued Kellem, alleging legal malpractice in connection with the Hull transaction. Eck was represented by Attorney Blake Godbout in that litigation. In June, 1989, while that malpractice action was still pending, Bisson sued Eck seeking to recover damages for alleged hazardous waste on the Norwood property. Attorney Godbout defended Eck in that matter, and took the position (consistent with Kellem's prior advice) that the language of the purchase and sale agreement precluded any liability to Bisson.
On May 22, 1990, Eck settled his malpractice action against Kellem. In connection with that settlement, Eck executed a release in favor of Kellem (and others). The operative provisions of the release are as follows:
"I hereby remise, release and forever discharge the said [Kellem] of and from all debts, demands, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, accounts, covenants, contracts, agreements, damages and any and all claims, demands and liabilities whatsoever of every name and nature, both in law and in equity, which against the said [Kellem] I now have or ever had from the beginning of the world to this date and more specially for personal injuries sustained by as the result of [Kellem's] alleged negligence and breach of contract arising out of the sale of the real estate locate at 48 A Street, Hull, Massachusetts, as more specifically set forth within Plymouth Superior Court Civil Action No. 88-1991 B."
Godbout represented Eck in the settlement of that action, and negotiated its te
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Massachusetts Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|