Yager v. Clauson

5 Citing cases

  1. Yager v. Clauson

    169 N.H. 1 (N.H. 2016)   Cited 15 times

    A. Relevant Facts This is the second appeal of this case and many of the underlying facts and procedural history are set forth in our prior decision, Yager v. Clauson, 166 N.H. 570, 101 A.3d 6 (2014). The client's legal malpractice claim stems from the defendants' representation of him in two timber trespass actions. Seeid. at 571, 101 A.3d 6.

  2. Tamposi v. Denby

    136 F. Supp. 3d 77 (D. Mass. 2015)   Cited 2 times

    To establish legal malpractice under New Hampshire law, under either a contract or tort theory, a plaintiff must prove (1) the existence of an attorney-client relationship, "which placed a duty upon the attorney to exercise reasonable professional care, skill and knowledge in providing legal services to that client;" (2) a breach of that duty; and (3) "resultant harm legally caused by that breach." Yager v. Clauson , 166 N.H. 570, 572–73, 101 A.3d 6, 9 (2014)(citing Estate of Sicotte v. Lubin & Meyer, P.C. , 157 N.H. 670, 674, 959 A.2d 236, 240 (2008). "Whether [an] attorney has breached the applicable standard of care in representing the client is a question of fact to be determined through expert testimony and usually cannot be decided as a matter of law."

  3. Johnson v. ProSelect Insurance Co.

    2013 CV 3981 (Mass. Super. Oct. 12, 2016)   Cited 1 times

    Expert testimony on proximate cause is required in cases where determination of that issue is not one that lay people would ordinarily be competent to make." Yager v. Clauson, 166 N.H. 570. 573, 101 A.3d 6 (2014) (quotations omitted). Massachusetts follows a comparable rule in legal malpractice cases.

  4. Johnson v. ProSelect Insurance

    33 Mass. L. Rptr. 637 (Mass. Super. 2016)

    Expert testimony on proximate cause is required in cases where determination of that issue is not one that lay people would ordinarily be competent to make.” Yager v. Clauson, 166 N.H. 570 , 573 (2014) (quotations omitted). Massachusetts follows a comparable rule in legal malpractice cases.

  5. Omran v. Bleezarde

    1:15-cv-00190-DBH (D.N.H. Aug. 14, 2015)

    Id.In a legal malpractice action, a plaintiff must demonstrate (1) that an attorney-client relationship existed that imposed a duty on the attorney to exercise reasonable professional care, skill and knowledge in providing legal services to the plaintiff; (2) a breach of that duty; and (3) resulting harm. Yager v. Clauson, 166 N.H. 570, 572-73, 101 A.3d 6, 9 (2014). In this case, Plaintiff does not complain about and could not reasonably complain about the ultimate result (i.e., dismissal) that Defendant helped Plaintiff achieve in the underlying criminal matter.