Outside Counsel

Right Rule, Wrong Result: The Trouble With 'K2-II'

, New York Law Journal


Matthew Siegel writes: In unwittingly allowing American Guarantee to rely on policy exclusions requiring proof of its attorney-insured's possible financial duplicity in "serving two masters," the Court of Appeals in 'K2-II,' oblivious to its own precedent, has impermissibly given American the imprimatur to relitigate the covered factual and legal bases for the negligence determination underlying K2's legal malpractice judgment against its insured, embroiling American in a conflict of interest.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisAdvance® Here

Not a LexisAdvance® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisAdvance® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisAdvance® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisAdvance® services via lexis.com® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Legaltech News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisAdvance® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202661592542

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.