This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Next revision | Previous revision Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
utah_court_cases:estate_attorney_malpractice_-_case_summary_murphy_v._housel [2022/08/11 21:19] admin created |
utah_court_cases:estate_attorney_malpractice_-_case_summary_murphy_v._housel [2022/08/11 21:33] admin |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== Estate Attorney Malpractice – Case Summary (Murphy v. Housel) ====== | ====== Estate Attorney Malpractice – Case Summary (Murphy v. Housel) ====== | ||
- | In 1985, Dominic Badura died. His will named his brothers and sister as the personal representatives (or executors) of his estate. One of the brothers, Mr. Badura, hired a law firm, Housel & Housel (“Housel”), | + | In 1985, Dominic Badura died. His will named his brothers and sister as the personal representatives (or executors) of his estate. One of the brothers, Mr. Badura, hired a law firm, Housel & Housel (“Housel”), |
In 1987, Housel filed paperwork valuing the estate at less than $400,000. In 1986, if an estate was worth over $400,000, the estate owed an “estate tax” to the IRS, so valuing the estate at less than $400,000 meant that no estate tax was due. Subsequently, | In 1987, Housel filed paperwork valuing the estate at less than $400,000. In 1986, if an estate was worth over $400,000, the estate owed an “estate tax” to the IRS, so valuing the estate at less than $400,000 meant that no estate tax was due. Subsequently, | ||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
Housel & Housel had clearly committed malpractice, | Housel & Housel had clearly committed malpractice, | ||
- | See our analysis of this case in the blog titled “TWO ATTORNEYS: WOULD YOU CHOOSE RIGHT THE FIRST TIME?“ | + | See our analysis of this case in the blog titled |
- | See Murphy v. Housel & Housel, 955 P.2d 880 (Wyoming 1988)[1]. | + | See {{wiki: |
By: Kelly Perri | By: Kelly Perri | ||
- | (([1] After Mr. Badura filed the lawsuit, Delphine Badura Murphy was substituted as a party to this case. Thus, the name of the case.)) | + |