|
No. 131035
| Harvey Grace, |
|
Mark Granzotto |
Plaintiff-Appellant, |
|
|
| v |
(Appeal from Ct of Appeals) |
|
|
(Oakland - Langford-Morris, D.) |
|
|
| Bruce Leitman and Bruce Leitman, P.C., |
|
Christine D. Oldani |
| Defendants-Appellees. |
|
|
| __________________________________________ |
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Plaintiff-Appellant's Brief on Appeal>>
Defendants-Appellees' Brief on Appeal>>
Insurance Institute of Michigan, ProNational Insurance Company, and Professionals Direct
Insurance Company's Amici Curiae Brief>>
State Bar of Michigan's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Background
When Harvey Grace and his wife Brooke Grace divorced in 1990, they entered into a separation agreement to split their marital assets evenly; the estate’s value was based on figures Harvey Grace provided. Shortly afterward, his ex-wife came to believe that she had been deceived about the value of one of the assets, and she sued Grace for fraud. In a 1998 trial, the ex-wife’s expert witness testified that Grace’s share in Grace & Wild Studios, Inc. – an asset Grace valued as worthless in the divorce – was probably worth $4 million to $6 million. Grace’s attorney, Bruce Leitman, challenged the expert’s credibility but did not call an expert witness to support Grace’s claims that the asset had no monetary value. It is undisputed that, at the time, Leitman was aware that another expert had given a deposition in an earlier lawsuit valuing the asset at $0; it is also undisputed that Leitman falsely told Grace that he had retained this expert. The jury ultimately ruled in the ex-wife’s favor and awarded her just over $3 million. In 2002, Grace sued Leitman and his law firm for legal malpractice, based largely on Leitman’s failure to call any expert witness to counter the ex-wife’s expert. The defendants moved to dismiss the case, arguing principally that Grace’s theories were barred because Leitman’s actions constituted a good-faith exercise of professional judgment. Grace’s response included an affidavit from another attorney, who described how Leitman’s actions fell below the applicable standard of care. Leitman’s conduct was a direct and proximate cause of the result in the fraud case, the attorney opined. But the trial court dismissed the case, finding that Grace “failed to present evidence that [the] Defendants’ actions were not in good faith or were based on anything other than an honest belief well founded in the law and in the best interest of their client.” The Court of Appeals affirmed in an unpublished per curiam opinion. Grace appeals.
Top of Page
|
