Voyvodich v. Marshall CA4/1
Defendant Charles Marshall appeals from a judgment following a bench trial in favor of plaintiffs Nick and Melissa Voyvodich on their complaint for legal malpractice. Marshall contends the trial court erred by not requiring expert testimony on negligence and causation; applying the wrong causation standards; determining damages incorrectly; and failing to exclude evidence of his suspension from the California State Bar. Marshall did not provide a reporter's transcript or adequate substitute, so our review is limited accordingly. We find no merit in his contentions, and we affirm.
Comments on Voyvodich v. Marshall CA4/1