Quantcast

Contractor who allegedly lost $1M from inadequate legal representation in bankruptcy case, now sues former counsel

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Monday, December 23, 2024

Contractor who allegedly lost $1M from inadequate legal representation in bankruptcy case, now sues former counsel

State Court
Stephenjtaczak

Taczak | Taczak Law

PITTSBURGH – A Pennsylvania contractor who says it lost over $1 million in an underlying bankruptcy lawsuit is now pursuing legal action against the lawyer it claims provided inadequate representation.

Odyssey Contracting Corporation of Houston, Pa. filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on Jan. 5 versus Chris Georgoulis and Georgoulis, PLLC, of New York, N.Y.

“Defendant represented plaintiff in litigation in the U.S. District Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The underlying litigation involved a contract dispute between Odyssey and L&L Painting Co., Inc. for a project on the Queensboro Bridge. At a pre-trial conference, defendant entered into a stipulation on behalf of plaintiff which provided if the court determined Odyssey was the breaching party, then all of the claims were disposed of in their entirety with prejudice,” the suit says.

“After the court determined that Odyssey was the breaching party, Odyssey appealed. L&L claimed that the stipulation waived Odyssey’s right to appeal. The court agreed and dismissed the proceeding with prejudice. Defendant appealed and the Third Circuit agreed that Odyssey waived its right to appeal.”

According to the plaintiff, this stipulation made by the defendant was counter to instructions provided by Odyssey to preserve the right to appeal, and furthermore, a breach of the defendant’s duty for the same.

The plaintiff says this turn of events caused it significant damages in the underlying action, significant fees to the defendant to prosecute the appeal and that it paid the over $1 million in legal fees, only to see the case dismissed on the basis of the defendant’s stipulation.

“Defendant had a duty to plaintiff to provide competent and adequate legal services. Defendant breached the duty to plaintiff by entering the stipulation without preserving plaintiff’s right to appeal. Defendant’s breach caused plaintiff significant damages in the loss of the underlying case and the defendant’s charges to prosecute the appeal to justify his own actions,” the suit states.

“Plaintiff contracted with defendant for legal services. Defendant breached the contract by failing to follow plaintiff’s instructions, and entering a stipulation which waived plaintiff’s rights of appeal. Defendant not only caused plaintiff damages by losing the underlying case, but then charged plaintiff additional monies to prosecute the appeal which was the result of defendant’s own conduct.”

For counts of negligence and breach of contract, the plaintiffs are seeking judgment in their favor and against the defendants, and further demand a trial by jury.

The plaintiff is represented by Stephen J. Taczak of Taczak Law, in Canonsburg.

The defendants have not yet secured legal counsel.

Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas case GD-22-000179

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com

More News