Espinosa v. Sparber, Shevin, Shapo, Rosen & Heilbronner

612 SO. 2D 1378 (1993)

Free access to 20,000 Casebriefs

Nature Of The Case

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Facts

Roskin drafted a will for Testator. The will contained no provision for after-born children. After the birth of a fourth child (P), who was not named in the will, Testator contacted Roskin about including the child in his will. A new will was drafted but never executed. Testator later executed a codicil which made no mention of the child. After Testator's death, his widow brought a malpractice action against Roskin and his firm (D) on the child's behalf. The complaint was dismissed for lack of privity of contract. The Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal.

Issues

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Holding & Decision

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal Analysis

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

© 2007-2025 ABN Study Partner

© 2025 Casebriefsco.com. All Rights Reserved.