Adam Jeffrey Katz, P.A. v. Jerome

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Adam Jeffrey Katz, P.A. v. Jerome

254 So. 3d 428

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 13, 2018·No. No. 4D17–2835·Published

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.

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

Pincite

254 So. 3d 428 (Adam Jeffrey Katz, P.A. v. Jerome) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related