Professional Liability Law
Professional Liability Law

Professional Liability

Our Knowledge in Professional Liability

Our Professional Liability attorneys defend professionals in several industries including law, accounting, medical and dental.

Legal Malpractice and Representation of Lawyers and Law Firms
Perhaps the ultimate endorsement of our Professional Liability attorneys is the fact that knowledgeable attorneys consistently turn to us for aggressive and experienced defense of complex legal malpractice cases. We have defended suits involving clients ranging from solo practitioners to the largest firms in the State of Wisconsin. That experience gives us the resources to handle these often unique, complicated and multi-faceted cases, requiring competence not only in malpractice law, but also in the areas of legal concentration in which such suits arise. We recognize and understand the emotional and legal concerns of the attorney; we act not just as lawyers, but as counselors. Our experience in handling legal malpractice cases has given us access to a broad network of legal professionals willing to act as consultants and experts.

Our work representing attorneys extends well beyond handling malpractice claims and includes advising and representing attorneys on firm merger, departure and acquisition issues, fee disputes, disciplinary complaints and reinstatement petitions.

As a result of our work in these areas, we have been substantially involved in the development of Wisconsin law by our appellate courts. In addition to regularly and successfully trying and litigating lawsuits involving these areas at the trial court level, representative appellate experience in these areas include the following:

  • General Accident v. Schoendorf & Sorgi and Seltrecht v. Bremer. Two related cases establishing the rules by which the liability of successively negligent attorneys representing the same client are determined.
  • Tank Transport v. Duffy. Establishing the basis for application of the higher expert standard of care for attorneys.
  • Schaefer v. Riegelman. Plaintiff’s legal malpractice complaint found invalidly executed due to failure to have signed by Wisconsin licensed attorney.
  • Markwardt, et al. v. Zurich American Insurance Company. Appropriateness and validity of agreement between attorney and departing associate for division of fees on contingent fee cases taken by departing associate.
  • In Re Loew. Affirmation of limited discipline imposed by referee based upon medical disability issues.
  • In Re Jacobson. Affirmation of limited discipline imposed in light of medical disability issues raised after taking over case following hearing and initial adverse result.

Accounting Malpractice
In addition to regularly and successfully trying and litigating lawsuits involving accounting malpractice at the trial court level, representative appellate experience include the following:

  • Krier v. Vilione. Affirmation of summary judgment in favor of defendants dismissing claims based upon inadequacy of expert testimony in an accounting malpractice case.

Medical/Dental Malpractice and Representation of Doctors and Dentists
We have defended physicians, dentists, hospitals, nurses and other medical professionals in hundreds of cases involving almost every medical specialty and conceivable medical malpractice issue. This includes representation not only in civil litigation, but also before professional and state administrative boards.

Our attorneys take a proactive role in guiding the medical community to insure quality medical care and assist in risk management issues by giving frequent presentations and lectures. Several of our attorneys have also addressed the state legislature and have served on advisory committees regarding changes in the medical malpractice law, specifically Chapter 655 of the Wisconsin Statutes, and the drafting of related medical negligence jury instructions.

In addition to regularly and successfully trying and litigating lawsuits at the trial court level, representative appellate experience includes the following:

  • Burks v. St. Joseph’s Hospital. Hospital’s violation of the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) results from a negligent medical act or from a decision made in the course of rendering professional medical care, and not merely an economic decision, the Patient Compensation Fund has an obligation to provide excess coverage.
  • Korntved v. Advanced Healthcare, Inc. Health care provider was not vicariously liable for employee’s act of disclosing information to her husband in violation of patient confidentiality when the employee was acting outside the scope of employment.


Section Leader

Other News

View all