Goodman v. Holmes & McLaurin Attorneys at Law
North Carolina Court of Appeals
665 S.E.2d 526 (2008)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
David Goodman (plaintiff) was injured in a car accident. Goodman retained the law firm of Holmes & McLaurin (H&M) (defendant) to bring claims against the tortfeasors. Edward McLaurin of H&M filed a complaint on behalf of Goodman but filed a voluntary dismissal without informing Goodman or obtaining Goodman’s consent. As a result of McLaurin’s failure to re-file the lawsuit within one year, Goodman’s claims were barred by the statute of limitations. McLaurin concealed his actions from Goodman by (1) advising Goodman that the tortfeasors were insured when the purported insurer did not exist, (2) telling Goodman he was negotiating a settlement with the insurer and submitting three settlement offers to Goodman, (3) forwarding to Goodman a trust memorandum from the insurer with regard to the accepted settlement offer, (4) making payments to Goodman’s account from H&M’s trust account and telling Goodman the payments were interim payments from the insurer, (5) sending Goodman a copy of the complaint McLaurin claimed he had filed against the tortfeasors and their insurer for breach of the settlement agreement and asking Goodman to execute a verification of the complaint, and (6) sending Goodman a copy of an email supposedly from a lawyer in Spain when Goodman pressed for confirmation of the matter’s status. When Goodman learned that McLaurin had dismissed and failed to refile Goodman’s claims and had not sued the insurer, Goodman filed an action against H&M based on McLaurin’s negligence and fraud. The trial court granted H&M’s motion to dismiss. Goodman appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Steelman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.