In this legal-malpractice case, the corporate plaintiff and its president appeal from an order granting defendants' summary-judgment motion. The trial court found plaintiffs' expert had failed to analyze how defendants' alleged breaches of the standard of care would have impacted a potential jury verdict or settlement and had not opined that defendants' alleged malpractice proximately caused any damages. The judge also dismissed the president's individual claim because the undisputed facts showed she and defendants did not have an attorney-client relationship.
The court affirms, holding plaintiffs had not established proximate cause as a matter of law and that expert testimony was necessary in this case to prove proximate causation and damages. With respect to the president's individual claim of legal malpractice, the court holds she failed to demonstrate the existence of an attorney-client relationship between herself and defendants.
