Hmmmm, this could get interesting.
A doctor who claims he had to take on a huge tax burden to pay his ex-wife $1.2 million pursuant to a divorce settlement
can bring a malpractice claim against the matrimonial lawyer who advised him to sign the allegedly "unrealistic" stipulation, a state appeals court has ruled.
Seth Fielding claims he incurred heavy taxes when he dipped into a retirement account to satisfy the stipulation, which provided that the payment was to be made from "immediately available" funds.
He accused Stephanie Kupferman of Kupferman & Kupferman ofrefusing to renegotiate the settlement after Dr. Fielding realized he could not obtain a mortgage or home equity line of credit on his Upper West Side apartment before finalizing his divorce. He also said she failed to inform him that splitting the retirement account would result in adverse tax consequences.
In reinstating Dr. Fielding's $500,000 action against Kupferman, a unanimous panel of the Appellate Division, 1st Department, in
Fielding v. Kupferman,756-756A, concluded that the documentary evidence "clearly establishes that the overwhelming majority of plaintiff's funds, including the amount necessary to satisfy the obligation to his wife, were not, as characterized by the stipulation 'immediately available.'"
Full Story:
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202432970675
Main Forums
Author
