Berryer v. Hertz

502 So. 2d 75, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6686
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 10, 1987·No. No. 86-903·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Manner v. Goldstein Professional Ass’n, 436 So.2d 431 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (in divorce action, spouse not permitted to avoid terms of property settlement agreement by simultaneous oral declaration); N.A. Kerson Co., Inc. v. Shayne, Dachs, Weiss, Kolbrenner, Levy & Moe Levine, 45 N.Y.2d 730, 408 N.Y.S.2d 475, 380 N.E.2d 302 (App.1978) (in legal malpractice action, where plaintiffs alleged that attorney had improperly entered into a stipulation withdrawing an affirmative defense in was later settled by stipulation entered in open court, plaintiffs were required to prove that they would have succeeded but for the withdrawal of the affirmative defense); cf. Cohen v. Lipsig, 92 A.D.2d 536, 459 N.Y.S.2d 98 (App.Div.1983) (a cause of action for legal malpractice is viable despite plaintiffs settlement of underlying action when such settlement was compelled because of the mistakes of defendant, plaintiffs former counsel).

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

Berryer v. Hertz, 502 So. 2d 75, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6686 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

502 So. 2d 75 (Berryer v. Hertz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Malver v. Sheffield Industries, Inc.
502 So. 2d 75 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)