William and Elizabeth Margrabe fired their lawyer for what they perceived as poor judgment, etc. When they included that information in a letter to the firm of Sexter and Warmflash (I kid you not, that’s the name of the firm), they sued the Margrabes for defamation for $1,000,000.
Trial court judge Shirley Werner Kornreich ruled that its suit could proceed, and ruled outright in Sexter’s favor on the Margrabes’ liability for the “usurious fee” allegation, but an appeals court reversed, ruling that the Margrabes were protected by a privilege extended to statements made as part of a legal proceeding.
Sometimes I thank God we have appeals courts, because frankly those “first level” judges almost always appear to be out of touch idiots. There’s no reason for me to think this one was any different. Mike Perry in the comments of the post about this story made a great point, and I was thinking the same thing:
Is there anyone who’d like to share more about charges made during a judicial proceedings being privileged? Is this something in law primarily intended to keep lawyers from being locked in an endless series of lawsuits with one another?
I open the floor to any lawyers / paralegals in the audience…
via Overlawyered.com
[tags]overlawyered, margrabe, sexter, warmflash, sexter and warmflash[/tags]