From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...
Wolski v. Wandel
Nebraska Supreme Court
746 N.W.2d 143 (2008)
Stanley Wolski, Jr. (plaintiff) was mentally disabled. Wolski’s parents conveyed 119 acres of farmland to him by warranty deed. A few days later, another warranty deed transferred the same 119 acres from Wolski to his sister, Rosemary Parriott, as trustee. There were no other details regarding the trust. Wolski and Parriott had a longstanding dispute over the income from the property. Wolski hired Josephine Wandel (defendant) to file an action to break any trust that existed and obtain fee-simple title to the land. After filing the lawsuit, Wandel filed a petition to appoint a guardian ad litem for Wolski. The petition was granted and Thomas Harmon was appointed. Harmon consulted with Wandel and conducted an investigation into the case. Wolski then agreed to settle the case, getting a life estate in the property with the remainder interest going to Parriott and her heirs. Afterward, Wolski hired a new attorney and attempted to set aside the settlement. Wolski also sued Wandel for legal malpractice. Wolski hired an expert, Ronald E. Reagan, who was a practicing attorney and retired judge, to provide an opinion on Wandel’s representation. Reagan testified by deposition that Wandel should have provided additional information to Harmon and that Harmon would not have recommended settling if Harmon had reviewed the additional information. Reagan also testified that the case should have been tried and Wolski would have won at trial. Reagan did not express an opinion on whether Wandel breached the applicable standard of care. Harmon also testified by deposition and stated that he had reviewed all of the case documentation. Harmon testified that none of the documents referenced by Reagan would have changed his opinion. Wandel also testified. Neither Wandel nor Harmon testified that Wandel breached the applicable standard of care. Wandel moved for summary judgment, and the trial court granted the motion. Wolski appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Stephan, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 605,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 605,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 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.