Berger

Gulf Insurance v. Berger, Kahn, Shafton, Moss, Figler, Simon & Gladstone

Good Law
79 Cal. App. 4th 114·93 Cal. Rptr. 2d 534
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 17, 2000B128560California7,939 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mallano, J.

Gulf Insurance Company (Gulf) appeals from a summary judgment rendered against it on its complaint for legal malpractice and breach of contract against defendants Berger, Kahn, Shafton, Moss, Figler, Simon & Gladstone (Berger Kahn) and its named partner, Leon Gladstone (Gladstone) (collectively, Berger Kahn and Gladstone; referred to as Berger Kahn defendants). Gulf contends that the trial court erroneously concluded that it lacked standing to sue the Berger Kahn defendants and that it failed to present a triable issue of material fact with regard to causation. Since we conclude that Gulf had standing and that the Berger Kahn defendants failed to meet their burden with regard to causation, we reverse the judgment.

Factual and Procedural Background

This legal malpractice action arises from the Berger Kahn defendants’ defense of Gulf’s insureds in a previous lawsuit entitled Coleman v. Singer (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 1994, No. BC114420) (Coleman Action).

A. The Coleman Action

In the Coleman Action, Thomas Coleman sued Nathan Singer (Singer), Signature Agency, Inc. (Signature), American Express Company, and Forum Insurance Company (Forum) (collectively, all defendants…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.