Simon v. Zipperstein

Supreme Court of Ohio · Decided 1987-08-12

Cited by 103 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Per Curiam. The sole consideration presented by this appeal is whether in the absence of fraud, collusion or malice, an attorney may be held liable in a malpractice action by a beneficiary or purported beneficiary of a will where privity is lacking. For the reasons that follow, we answer this question in the negative and reverse the judgment of the court of appeals. It is by now well-established in O…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.