Attorney‑client relationship between ex‑husband and ex‑husband’s attorney in underlying divorce action did not alone establish that ex‑husband and attorney were in privity, as an element of res judicata, and thus prior fraud action by ex‑wife, arising from ex‑husband’s fraudulent valuation of a business interest for purposes of distribution of property in divorce action, did not preclude ex‑wife from bringing subsequent fraud action against attorney arising from attorney’s alleged role in husband’s fraud; although ex‑husband and attorney had a common interest in obtaining a favorable outcome in the divorce action, they did not share a mutuality of legal interest in the outcome in the divorce action.
Laura Morgan is a Family Law Consultant. Laura is available for consultation, brief writing and research on family law issues throughout the country. She can be reached through her https://mn.gov/law-library/search//supct/1101/OPA081730-0105.pdf
Published on:
