Adam Jeffrey Katz, P.A. v. Jerome

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Adam Jeffrey Katz, P.A. v. Jerome

254 So. 3d 428

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 13, 2018

DocketNo. 4D17–2835

StatusPublished

This text of 254 So. 3d 428 (Adam Jeffrey Katz, P.A. v. Jerome) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adam Jeffrey Katz, P.A. v. Jerome, 254 So. 3d 428 (Fla. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Affirmed. See Evans v. McDonald , 313 F. App'x. 256, 257 (11th Cir. 2009) (noting expert testimony in legal malpractice action is not required where "the lawyer's lack of care and skill is so obvious that the trier of fact can resolve the issue as a matter of common knowledge"); Suritz v. Kelner , 155 So.2d 831, 834 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963) (finding expert testimony was unnecessary where jury could find the attorney was negligent based on the facts presented by the plaintiff).

Warner, Taylor and Levine, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

Affirmed. See Evans v. McDonald , 313 F. App'x. 256, 257 (11th Cir. 2009) (noting expert testimony in legal malpractice action is not required where "the lawyer's lack of care and skill is so obvious that the trier of fact can resolve the issue as a matter of common knowledge"); Suritz v. Kelner , 155 So.2d 831, 834 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963) (finding expert testimony was unnecessary where jury could find the attorney was negligent based on the facts presented by the plaintiff).

Warner, Taylor and Levine, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 So. 3d 428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adam-jeffrey-katz-pa-v-jerome-fladistctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack