Civil Litigation,
Law Practice
May 16, 2019
Edwards Wildman trial begins with a strange twist
A superior court jury heard opening statements and testimony Wednesday aimed at determining the validity of the business practices of international law firm Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP, which is being sued by a former client for alleged malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract.
LOS ANGELES -- A superior court jury heard opening statements and witness testimony Wednesday aimed at determining the validity of the business practices of international law firm Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP, which is being sued by a former client for alleged malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract.
A former attorney and onetime employee of Edwards Wildman Palmer, Erin (Pfaff) Fagerlind, repeatedly said from the ...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In
Enewsletter Sign-up
Related Content
Civil Litigation, Law Practice, Ethics/Professional Responsibility
Judge questions purpose of witnesses’ day-long testimony
By Carter Stoddard
Civil Litigation, Law Practice
Odd turns of malpractice trial include lawyer reading British tabloid
By Carter Stoddard
Civil Litigation, Law Practice, Ethics/Professional Responsibility
Edwards Wildman counsel cross-examines plaintiff’s lawyer wife
By Blaise Scemama
Civil Litigation, Law Practice, Ethics/Professional Responsibility
Judge worries jury doesn’t understand legal malpractice case
By Carter Stoddard
Civil Litigation, Law Practice, Ethics/Professional Responsibility
Judge concerned about law firm duty explanations to jury
By Carter Stoddard
Attorneys
Edwards Wildman Palmer v. Superior Court (Mireskandari)
Intrafirm communication between attorneys related to client’s dissatisfaction with firm’s representation may be confidential under attorney-client privilege.
