Landrigan v. Nelson

420 N.W.2d 313, 227 Neb. 835, 1988 Neb. LEXIS 79
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 18, 1988
Docket86-145
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 420 N.W.2d 313 (Landrigan v. Nelson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Landrigan v. Nelson, 420 N.W.2d 313, 227 Neb. 835, 1988 Neb. LEXIS 79 (Neb. 1988).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an action for damages alleged to have been caused by acts of defendants constituting legal malpractice.

Patrick G. Landrigan and Paul J. Landrigan (known as the Landrigan boys) retained the defendant Patrick J. Nelson as their attorney in the negotiation of a restaurant lease in Kearney, Nebraska. The Landrigan boys are denominated plaintiffs, but are not involved in this appeal. The plaintiffs *836 who are involved as appellants are Paul E. Landrigan and his wife, Alda J. Landrigan, parents of the Landrigan boys; Janice J. Landrigan, wife of Patrick Landrigan; and Sandra Herbig, sister of the Landrigan boys.

The appellants signed two real estate mortgages securing the lease payments due from the Landrigan boys under the lease above noted. Upon default of such payments, the mortgages were foreclosed, and this action followed.

The trial court sustained defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissed appellants’ action, finding no duty was owed them by defendants.

We have reviewed the record and find no evidence that either defendant Nelson or his law firm and the members thereof, the other defendants herein, acted as attorneys for appellants. The rule is well established that a lawyer’s duty is to his client and does not extend to third parties absent facts establishing a duty to them. Ames Bank v. Hahn, 205 Neb. 353, 287 N.W.2d 687 (1980); Lilyhorn v. Dier, 214 Neb. 728, 335 N.W.2d 554 (1983). As no attorney-client relationship existed between appellants and defendants, and as no other facts or circumstances were shown which establish a duty to appellants, we determine the action of the trial court was correct.

We also decline appellants’ request that this court enlarge the scope of an attorney’s liability to third parties.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Perez v. Stern
777 N.W.2d 545 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2010)
Swanson v. Ptak
682 N.W.2d 225 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2004)
Streeks, Inc. v. Diamond Hill Farms, Inc.
605 N.W.2d 110 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2000)
Earth Science Laboratories, Inc. v. Adkins & Wondra, P.C.
523 N.W.2d 254 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1994)
Lawyers Title Ins. Corp. v. Hoffman
513 N.W.2d 521 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1994)
John Day Co. v. Alvine & Associates, Inc.
510 N.W.2d 462 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1993)
Brooks v. Zebre
792 P.2d 196 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1990)
Citizens National Bank v. Kennedy & Coe
441 N.W.2d 180 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
420 N.W.2d 313, 227 Neb. 835, 1988 Neb. LEXIS 79, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/landrigan-v-nelson-neb-1988.