Practice Group | Bassford Remele

Represented a law firm, obtaining a decision affirming the district court’s dismissal of a complaint based on plaintiff’s lack of compliance with Minnesota Statute § 544.42, and entry of default judgment for failing to respond to defendants’ counterclaim. (2021).

Represented a law firm, obtaining a decision affirming the district court’s summary judgment on claims of alleged malpractice and negligence, as well as claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and for aiding and abetting another trustee in alleged breaches of fiduciary duty. Schreier, 611 F. Supp. 3d 746 (D. Minn. 2020).

Represented lawyers and a law firm, obtaining affirmance of the district court’s summary judgment involving but-for causation. (2020).

Represented a law firm, obtaining a decision affirming dismissal of claims due to a failure to timely provide expert opinions needed to establish a prima facie case of negligence or legal malpractice. (2018).

Represented a lawyer, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment due to the lack of factual basis that would support the alleged malpractice claim. (2018).

Represented a lawyer, obtaining a decision reversing, in part, the district court's decision to dismiss on summary judgment for claims arising out of legal malpractice, breach of contract, negligence, and fraudulent misrepresentation. (2017).

Represented interested party as amicus curiae, submitting brief and successfully arguing that an expert’s disclosure in a legal malpractice claim must meet the meaningful disclosure standard of the Brown-Wibert test. Guzick, 869 N.W.2d 42 (Minn. 2015).

Represented a lawyer and their law firm, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment because the claims were collaterally estopped. (2015).

Defended a law firm and its attorneys at trial, obtaining a defense jury verdict involving negligence and but-for causation claims. (2015).

Represented a law firm, obtaining summary judgment on causation grounds. (2014).

Represented a lawyer, obtaining a decision affirming the district court's denial of a motion to vacate a previous order because the district court properly dismissed the claims under the law. (2014).

Represented a lawyer and their law firm, obtaining a decision affirming dismissal due to a failure to comply with expert-affidavit requirements. (2011).

Represented a law firm, obtaining dismissal of claims arising out of the foreclosure of a mortgage encumbering an apartment building. (2011).

Represented a law firm, obtaining partial dismissal in a case involving a real estate transaction. (2011).

Represented a law firm and its attorney, obtaining dismissal in a partnership dispute. (2010).

Represented a lawyer and law firm, obtaining a decision granting summary judgment on employment discrimination claims and related malpractice claims because the underlying claims failed as a matter of law. (2010).

Represented a law firm, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment because of the failure to establish actual-harm. (2009).

Represented a law firm and its attorneys, obtaining dismissal in legal malpractice case on but-for causation grounds. (2008).

Represented a law firm, obtaining a decision affirming the district court's dismissal due to the failure to comply with the expert-review statute. (2006).

Represented a law firm and its attorneys, obtaining a favorable outcome in a matter involving jurisdictional grounds. Janssen, 704 N.W.2d 759 (Minn. 2005).

Represented a lawyer, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment based on client’s agreement to settle underlying claim. (2005).

Represented a lawyer and law firm, obtaining a decision affirming the dismissal of the complaint because the claims were collaterally estopped. (2005).

Represented an attorney, obtaining dismissal in a case involving legal-malpractice and breach-of-fiduciary-duty claims. (2003).

Represented a law firm, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment because the client's alleged undisclosed information was not material to the law firm's representation and therefore the law firm did not breach any fiduciary duty. STAR Ctr., Inc., 644 N.W.2d 72 (Minn. 2002).

Represented attorneys, obtaining a decision reversing the district court's award of attorney fees because attorney fees are not generally recoverable in a legal malpractice action. (2002).

Represented lawyers and law firm, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment because the claims were collaterally estopped. (2001).

Represented a lawyer, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment as a matter of law due to the absence of an attorney-client relationship. (1999).

Represented a lawyer, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment because there was no showing the lawyer was the proximate cause of the alleged damages in the legal malpractice claim. (1999).

Represented a lawyer and law firm, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment because materials submitted were not part of the official record. (1998).

Represented a lawyer and law firm, obtaining a decision granting summary judgment due to lack of evidence the lawyer acted negligently and because there was no attorney-client relationship at the time of the alleged negligent acts; affirmed at Eighth Circuit. Fletcher, 909 F. Supp. 678 (D. Minn. 1995).

Represented a law firm, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment due to the failure to establish causation regarding the legal malpractice claims. Rampy, 224 B.R. 701 (D. Minn. 1997).

Represented an attorney, obtaining dismissal in the first case in Minnesota to apply first amendment protections to shield a lawyer from liability for statements about a legal matter. Richie, 544 N.W.2d 21 (Minn. 1996).

Represented a lawyer and law firm, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment because local counsel did not have a duty to monitor lead's counsel's handling of requests for admissions in the legal malpractice suit. Macawber Eng'g, Inc., 47 F.3d 253 (8th Cir. 1995).

Represented an insurer, obtaining a decision that a policy provision making shareholders and employees of insured liable for deductible is invalid insofar as it applies to employees and shareholders who have not been personally named in malpractice suit, and a provision is valid as applied to an attorney who is sued for malpractice. London, Anderson & Hoeft, Ltd., 530 N.W.2d 576 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995).

Represented a lawyer, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment because the former clients failed to present a prima facie case of legal malpractice. (1995).

Represented a lawyer and law firm, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment due to lapsed statute of limitations. (1995).

Represented a lawyer and law firm, obtaining a decision granting dismissal due to a lack of personal jurisdiction. Nash Finch Co., 867 F. Supp. 866 (D. Minn. 1994).

Represented a lawyer, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment regarding attorney work in forming non-profit organization. (1994).

Represented a law firm, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment on a legal malpractice claim on but-for causation grounds. (1993).

Represented a lawyer and law firm, obtaining a decision affirming summary judgment due to the lack of genuine issue of material fact and lack of a question of law. (1991).