Torts — Legal malpractice — Insurance carrier — Privity — Law firm hired by insurer to defend insured against liability claims — Insurer lacked standing to sue law firm where nothing in evidence indicates that law firm was in privity with insurer or that insurer was an intended third-party beneficiary — Public policy does not dictate that an insurer should be able to pursue legal malpractice claims against defense counsel it retains to represent its insureds and the court is unwilling to expand field of privity exceptions
44 Fla. L. Weekly D269a
The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney.
opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index