United States Fourth Circuit

In a malpractice action brought against defendant-law firm, who represented plaintiff-attorney in his challenge to a court order imposing sanctions on him rather than his clients, alleging that defendant-law firm failed to timely appeal the order, summary judgment for defendant-law firm is affirmed, where: 1) the district court correctly concluded that plaintiff suffered no injury because of the late notice of appeal, inasmuch as the district court in the earlier action properly employed Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a) to clarify its sanctions orders; and therefore, 2) plaintiff would not have succeeded on his appeal of that order, even had the notice of appeal been timely filed.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/23/2014
• Published 06/23/2014

Judges

• NIEMEYER

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel