Representative Cases

These are cases and judgments represented by the experienced lawyers of Gaslowitz Frankel LLC:

Colonial Bank v. Boulder Bankcard Processing Co., 254 Ga. App. 686, 563 S.E.2d 492 (2002). The Georgia Court of Appeals upheld a summary judgment and an award of attorneys’ fees in which our client, a credit card processing company, sued a bank for breach of a guarantee contract.

Information Systems Network Corp. v. City of Atlanta, 281 F.3d 1220 (11th Cir. 2002). Our client sued the City of Atlanta for breach of a Y2K consulting contract worth several millions of dollars. After a federal judge ruled in favor of the City, this firm was hired to handle the appeal. The federal appellate court reversed the trial court, enabling this firm to negotiate a favorable settlement.

Kievman v. Kievman, 260 Ga. 853, 400 S.E.2d 317 (1991). This firm defended an estate in which several children challenged the will of their father. The Georgia Supreme Court upheld a judgment in favor of the estate on undue influence, but also held that the issue of testamentary capacity was for a jury. At the subsequent jury trial, the jury ruled in favor of our client.

Softball Country Club-Atlanta v. Decatur Federal Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 121 F.3d 649 (11th Cir. 1997). Our client, the founders of Softball Country Club, sued the bank for fraud. The federal appellate court upheld a jury award to our clients for compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees and expenses.

Yeazel v. Burger King Corp., 241 Ga. App. 90, 526 S.E.2d 1112 (1999). We represented a franchisee in a breach of a franchise agreement against Burger King. The Georgia Court of Appeals ruled in favor of our clients on all legal issues presented.
Significant Cases Not Reported
We represented a class of retired teachers who challenged the elimination of retirement benefits as unconstitutional, which resulted in a net payment to the retired teachers in excess of $57 million.

We represented Albert Gore, Jr. and Joseph Lieberman in the Florida election contest, focusing on Broward County issues and appellate issues.

We successfully defended a breach of contract lawsuit against a large telecommunications company seeking several million dollars of damages.

We prosecuted a lawsuit against a national accounting firm for breach of a consulting and licensing agreement, resulting in an award of the full damages requested plus attorneys’ fees and interest.

We defended a large wholesaler of automobiles in a lawsuit filed by a national bank for allegedly defrauding the bank out of $35 million.

We represented an inventor in a lawsuit against a national internet company for misappropriating his invention. The cases settled before trial for a substantial amount.

We have successfully represented numerous beneficiaries claiming that a trustee breached his fiduciary duties, resulting in awards or settlements in the millions of dollars.

We have successfully represented numerous family members who challenged a family member’s will, resulting in the will being set aside and restoring their inheritance.

We have successfully defended numerous claims by beneficiaries that our client, who served as a trustee, breached its fiduciary duties.

We have successfully defended numerous probate estates where a disgruntled family member claimed that the will was obtained through fraud or undue influence or where the plaintiff claimed the decedent lacked testamentary capacity.

Legal News & Firm Updates

✩ Young v. Williams - Beneficiary of Will May Sue Drafting Attorney for Malpractice

Posted: May 7th, 2007 by Gaslowitz Frankel LLC

Gaslowitz Frankel LLC recently won a ruling from the Court of Appeals that, for better or worse, clarified the law in Georgia on the subject of whether or not a beneficiary has standing to bring a claim against the attorney who drafted a will excluding the beneficiary from an intended gift. In that decision, issued on April 17, 2007, the Georgia Court of Appeals held that a beneficiary of a will may sue the drafting attorney for malpractice if he or she was intended to benefit from the will.

In Young v. Williams, 2007 WL 1121740, Docket No. A07A0030 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007), the attorney who drafted a will for James Williams neglected to include requested language leaving the marital residence to Betsy Williams, the surviving spouse. Mrs. Williams, represented by Gaslowitz Frankel LLC, sued the drafting attorney for malpractice. The drafting attorney admitted that he had made a terrible mistake that would otherwise constitute malpractice, but he argued that Mrs. Williams did not have standing to sue him for malpractice.

The trial court rejected this argument and entered summary judgment in favor of Mrs. Williams. On appeal by the drafting attorney, the Court of Appeals affirmed holding that a contract with a lawyer to draft a will, like any other contract under Georgia law, was subject to the third-party beneficiary rule. Thus, where a person hires a lawyer to draft a will and intends for the will to benefit a spouse (or other person), the spouse (or other person) has the right to sue the attorney for malpractice after the will is probated if it did not provide for what the decedent wanted.

Related News   Civil Appeals, Firm News, Representative Cases, Will and Estate Disputes, Wrongful Interference
02-08-2006 ✩ Mowell v. Marks - Liability for Serving Alcohol to Minors
07-02-2004 ✩ Hoffman v. Oxendine - Open Records Act
04-11-2003 ✩ Griffin v. Wallace - Rules Regarding the Settlement of an Estate Dispute
09-16-2002 ✩ Preuss v. Stokes-Preuss - In Terrorem Clause
05-08-2002 ✩ Jones v. Sperau - Undue Influence Generally a Jury Question
03-05-2002 ✩ White v. Regions Bank - Testamentary Capacity and Undue Influence
03-01-2002 ✩ In re: Estate of Garmon - Reimbursement of Attorney’s Fees from Estate
07-31-2001 ✩ In re: Copelan - Adult Guardianship Petition
03-13-1996 ✩ Tankesley v. Thompson - Advancements Under a Will