Opinion
Case No. 07-CV-14268.
December 12, 2008
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
This legal malpractice action arises out of defendant Robert Schuler's alleged mishandling and settlement of a lawsuit brought against plaintiffs Geoffrey Hockman, Robert D. Falor, and The Falor Companies. Schuler moved for summary judgment based on the doctrine of judicial estoppel and also for sanctions against plaintiffs and their counsel for alleged bad faith conduct. On September 9, 2008, this Court denied defendant's motions by written order (Doc. 47). Now before the Court is defendant's motion for clarification of that order. Having shown good cause, defendant's motion shall be granted.
Specifically, Schuler moves to clarify that three statements in the Court's September 9, 2008 order are not to be taken as judicial determinations of fact or law. Those statements are (1) "Schuler was also involved in the administration of these limited liability companies, and at various times provided legal services to these entities," (Doc. 47, p. 2); (2) [a]fter $200,000 had been payed to R Z, Plaintiffs defaulted and R Z executed upon the collateral," (Doc. 47, p. 2); and (3) "[a]s Schuler is a licensed attorney, it was reasonable for Hockman to assume that his interests were being represented by Schuler." (Doc. 47, p. 6-7). Defendant is correct that none of the above quoted statements from the Court's opinion are to be taken as the ultimate judicial determinations of fact or law. Accordingly, Schuler's motion for clarification (Doc. 48) hereby is GRANTED.
SO ORDERED.