Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration v. Musick, Peeler
Appellant (Perpetual) sued respondent Musick, Peeler & Garrett, LLP (Musick) for malpractice, claiming that Musicks negligence resulted in Perpetual being deprived of about $7 million from the estate of Perpetuals deceased founder, L. Owen Traynor (Owen). Musick moved for summary judgment, inter alia,[1]on the grounds that Perpetual made an admission that Musick met the standard of care and therefore could not establish breach of that standard. Instead of offering conflicting evidencesuch as an expert declaration establishing a breach of the standard of carePerpetual opted to attack the admissibility of Musicks evidence on limited grounds. The trial court granted summary judgment for Musick. Perpetual appeals, contending that the trial court erred when it found that Musicks evidence was admissible. But this appeal lacks merit. Perpetuals attack on the admissibility of Musicks evidence cannot carry the day. And having chosen a strategy of attacking Musicks evidence rather than submitting its own evidenceeven though Perpetual couldhave submitted an expert declaration, as it repeatedly informs us in its appellate briefsPerpetual is wed to its strategy. Therefore, there are no triable issues and summary judgment is affirmed.
Comments on Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration v. Musick, Peeler