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
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Attorney Negligence

Thomas Lutge v. Michael Miller, Esq., Brodsky, Baskin & Miller

Published: Apr. 24, 2010 | Result Date: Apr. 2, 2010 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: CGC-05-440436 Verdict –  $275,000 (gross)

Court

San Francisco Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Bruce M. Glassner

William M. Gwire


Defendant

Basil N. Plastiras Jr.
(Plastiras & Terrizzi)

Michael C. Miller


Experts

Plaintiff

Michael A. Matthews
(technical)

J. Michael Mathews
(technical)

Facts

The underlying case was a construction dispute between homeowners and Thomas Lutge, a civil engineer and construction contractor. Lutge, through his attorney, Michael Miller, sued the homeowners for unpaid work. The homeowners cross-claimed for fraud, negligence, breach of contract, and statutory violations. Within days of trial, the case settled with Lutge paying the homeowners $245,000 out of his pocket.

Lutge filed suit against Miller for malpractice. Miller filed a cross-claim for unpaid legal fees.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Lutge contended that Miller failed to tender the homeowners' cross-claim to Lutge's insurance carrier, mistakenly thinking that there was no coverage available. Lutge contended that he was therefore denied a paid defense. Further, Lutge contended that Miller failed to investigate the facts and marshal the evidence, so that Miller was completely unprepared when, mere days before trial, certain deposition testimony failed to support some of his client's claims.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defense claimed that Lutge pulled a "bait and switch" upon the homeowners, luring them into a contract Lutge did not intend to perform. Miller contended that Lutge then misrepresented the facts to him. Miller did not perform an independent investigation of the evidence because he relied completely upon his client's version of the facts. Further, Miller contended that there would have been no coverage or defense available to Lutge from his insurance.

Damages

Lutge sought to recover $245,000 paid to the homeowners in the underlying settlement and $30,000 in paid but allegedly unearned legal fees. Miller claimed $38,000 in unpaid legal fees.

Result

The jury found Miller liable for legal negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligent misrepresentation/failure to disclose and awarded Lutge $275,000. Although found to have had clean hands, Lutge was determined to be 25 percent comparatively negligent. Lutge's net recover, after allocation, was $206,250. The jury found in favor of Lutge on Brodsky, Baskin & Miller's cross-claim.

Other Information

FILING DATE: April 14, 2005.

Deliberation

6.5 hours

Poll

9-3

Length

10 days


#124174

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

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