FBK ASSOCIATES, ETC.,
v.
TEW CARDENAS, LLP, ETC., ET AL.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Legal Malpractice cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Concluding that there was no genuine issue of material fact in this appeal of a summary judgment order on the legal malpractice action below, we affirm. See Weisser v. Dolan, 253 So. 3d 49, 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (“This Court reviews summary judgment orders de novo, and summary judgment is only appropriate if there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”) (citing Volusia Cty. v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126, 130 (Fla. 2000)). “It is well settled that a cause of action for legal malpractice has three elements: ‘(1) the attorney's employment; (2) the attorney's neglect of a reasonable duty; and (3) the attorney's negligence resulted in and was the proximate cause of the loss to the client.’” Weisser, 253 So. 3d at, 51-52 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (quoting Sure Snap Corp. v. Baena, 705 So. 2d 46, 48 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Volusia Cnty. v. Aberdeen AT Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 2000)
- Sure Snap Corp. & Elaine Shure v. Baena, 705 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
- Weisser v. Dolan, 253 So. 3d 49 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)