Morrison Mahoney Partner Scott Burke and Associate Sarah Mondo recently secured a Motion to Dismiss at Suffolk Superior Court on behalf of their client, a law firm.
Plaintiffs alleged the decedent had engaged the law firm to make changes to her existing will. However, prior to the execution of this will, the decedent passed away. Plaintiffs allege that they were to be third-party beneficiaries under this new will and brought claims against the law firm seeking to hold it liable for failure to ensure that the drafted will was executed prior to decedent’s death. Plaintiffs brought a seven-count complaint, alleging among other claims, breach of contract, negligence and malpractice, and violation of M.G.L. c. 93A.
Scott and Sarah moved to dismiss these claims, arguing that the plaintiffs failed to allege that the decedent entered into a contract with the law firm to specifically benefit the plaintiffs to make them intended beneficiaries. They further argued that the law firm owed no duty of care to the plaintiffs as there was no attorney-client relationship between the parties.
In its 20-page decision, the Court agreed and dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint in its entirety. The Court held that Plaintiffs could not qualify as third-party beneficiaries to the decedent’s contract for legal services for the drafting of a will and thus the law firm could not be liable for failing to fulfill any contractual duties to the non-client third-party Plaintiffs. Similarly, the Court held that the law firm did not owe a duty to the Plaintiffs as there was no attorney-client relationship between the parties. Importantly, the Court noted in a footnote that even if any such duty had been owed to the Plaintiffs, it was dubious that Plaintiff’s allegations would create a viable claim of legal malpractice.
