Failing to carry the proper legal malpractice insurance can lead to significant sanctions, but it does not destroy a law firm’s limited liability protection, according to the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court.
The Facts of the Case
Seeking to dismiss a legal malpractice lawsuit, defendant John Ward argued that he is shielded from liability as a partner in Ward and Olivio, LLP and is therefore not vicariously liable for the alleged legal malpractice of his former partner, defendant John Olivo. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 42:1A-18c, a partner in an LLP is generally not personally liable for the acts of another partner. However, the plaintiff argued that the firm’s insurance lapsed while the partners were winding down the firm, causing it to revert to a general New Jersey partnership.
Thus, the primary issue in Mortgage Grader v. Ward & Olivowas whether an attorney loses his liability protection as a partner in a limited liability partnership (LLP) if the LLP failed to purchase a tail insurance policy, which provides insurance coverage for malpractice that occurs during the claims-made policy coverage period but is reported after the claims-made policy has lapsed. The trial court previously held that violating the insurance rules relegated the LLP to a general partnership and thereby exposed the partners to vicarious liability for each other’s malpractice.
The Court’s Decision
The Appellate Division reversed. “We disagree with the motion judge that such a sanction is authorized and hold that when attorneys practice law as an LLP, and the LLP fails to obtain and maintain professional liability insurance as required … the LLP does not revert to a general partnership,” the appeals court held.
Instead, the Appellate Division stated that failing to carry the proper insurance is grounds for the Supreme Court to terminate or suspend the firm’s right to practice law or otherwise discipline it.
“Our Supreme Court has chosen to discipline attorneys without malpractice insurance that are organized as professional corporations, rather than dissolve their corporate structure,” the opinion explains. In reaching their decision, the justices cited cases in which lawyers were censured or disbarred for violating the state’s insurance requirements.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
NJ Appeals Court Rules Insurance Violation Does Not Destroy Law Firm’s Limited Liability Protection
Author: John M. Scagnelli
Failing to carry the proper legal malpractice insurance can lead to significant sanctions, but it does not destroy a law firm’s limited liability protection, according to the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court.
The Facts of the Case
Seeking to dismiss a legal malpractice lawsuit, defendant John Ward argued that he is shielded from liability as a partner in Ward and Olivio, LLP and is therefore not vicariously liable for the alleged legal malpractice of his former partner, defendant John Olivo. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 42:1A-18c, a partner in an LLP is generally not personally liable for the acts of another partner. However, the plaintiff argued that the firm’s insurance lapsed while the partners were winding down the firm, causing it to revert to a general New Jersey partnership.
Thus, the primary issue in Mortgage Grader v. Ward & Olivowas whether an attorney loses his liability protection as a partner in a limited liability partnership (LLP) if the LLP failed to purchase a tail insurance policy, which provides insurance coverage for malpractice that occurs during the claims-made policy coverage period but is reported after the claims-made policy has lapsed. The trial court previously held that violating the insurance rules relegated the LLP to a general partnership and thereby exposed the partners to vicarious liability for each other’s malpractice.
The Court’s Decision
The Appellate Division reversed. “We disagree with the motion judge that such a sanction is authorized and hold that when attorneys practice law as an LLP, and the LLP fails to obtain and maintain professional liability insurance as required … the LLP does not revert to a general partnership,” the appeals court held.
Instead, the Appellate Division stated that failing to carry the proper insurance is grounds for the Supreme Court to terminate or suspend the firm’s right to practice law or otherwise discipline it.
“Our Supreme Court has chosen to discipline attorneys without malpractice insurance that are organized as professional corporations, rather than dissolve their corporate structure,” the opinion explains. In reaching their decision, the justices cited cases in which lawyers were censured or disbarred for violating the state’s insurance requirements.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
