This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Attorneys
Negligence
Failure to Contest

Evelyn Gregory, et al. v. Gerald N. Hill

Published: May 3, 1997 | Result Date: Nov. 4, 1996 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: SCV167943 –  $0

Judge

David L. Allen

Court

Sonoma Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Charles A. Connors III


Defendant

Joel S. Coble


Experts

Plaintiff

Keith Charleston
(technical)

Defendant

Tom Anderson
(technical)

Facts

In March 1986, plaintiffs Evelyn and Frank Gregory sustained fire damage to their home in Sonoma. They hired the defendant attorney to assist in negotiating their claim with the insurance company. The plaintiffs and their insurance company were unable to agree on the amount of loss, and in particular, the payment for increased cost of living. A panel of three fire loss appraisers agreed on an award favorable to the plaintiffs, but the plaintiffs were not satisfied with the amount. The plaintiffs brought this action against the defendant based on legal malpractice and negligence theories of recovery.

Settlement Discussions

The verdict was reached approximately ___ years and ____ months after the case was filed. A settlement conference / arbitration / mediation was held on ___/___/19___ before ___________________________ (name) of ______________________________________ (affiliation/court) resulting in ______________________. The plaintiffs' motion for new trial was ______________. EXPERT TESTIMONY: Any interesting expert testimony? Any interesting comment/info on judge/arbitrator/mediator?

Injuries

The plaintiffs claimed damages for emotional distress, as well as additional amounts for costs of living during rebuilding.

Other Information

Per the defendant, the testimony showed that the actual award of living costs for nine months was larger than what would have been awarded if the defendant had contested and vacated the award. Per the defendant, the judge found that the plaintiffs' 18-month delay in rebuilding was not caused by the defendant and was contrary to the defendant's advice to the plaintiffs to immediately begin rebuilding.

Deliberation

____ hours/days

Poll

___-___ (#s pls)

Length

2 days


#101485

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390