Legal Malpractice: Summary Judgment for Attorney Affirmed

Brown v. Green (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Sep. 1, 2009)(Hedges)

In this cause, Willard E. Brown III appeals from a grant of summary judgment favoring appellees, attorney George Maynard Green and the law firm of Sheehy, Lovelace & Mayfield, P.C. Brown sued appellees alleging breach of fiduciary duty and professional malpractice. The trial court granted summary judgment on both traditional and no-evidence grounds against each of these causes of action. In four issues on appeal, Brown attacks the trial court's grant of (1) a traditional summary judgment against the breach of fiduciary duty cause of action; (2) a no-evidence summary judgment against that cause of action; (3) a traditional summary judgment against the malpractice cause of action; and (4) a no-evidence summary judgment against that cause of action.[1]

The court affirms in a lengthy opinion written by Chief Justice Hedges, which is worth reading as it covers many procedural and substantive points of law.

Brown v. Green (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Sep. 1, 2009)(Hedges)(legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty) (SJ for defendant affirmed) AFFIRMED: Opinion by Chief Justice Hedges Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Brock Yates and Frost 14-08-00592-CV Willard E. Brown III v. George Maynard Green and Sheehy, Lovelace & Mayfield, P.C. Appeal from 74th District Court of McLennan County (name of judge not shown on docket)