In Mattera v. Nusbaum, et al, MMP&S successfully obtained a Court-Ordered pre-answer dismissal with prejudice for our clients, a law firm and its partners, in connection with a six-count complaint alleging legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, unjust enrichment and conspiracy. Plaintiff filed the action based upon the law firm’s alleged betrayal of him in connection with two separate but somewhat related incidents including: 1) a derivative class action wherein the law firm secured a settlement for its clients and 2) an investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), which ultimately led to Plaintiff’s prosecution and imprisonment. MMP&S argued that plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint should be dismissed with prejudice because (1) it was a shot-gun pleading, despite the Court giving the plaintiff specific instructions on how to properly amend it after the Court dismissed plaintiff’s first version of the Complaint; (2) plaintiff failed to properly plead the necessary elements of his causes of action; and (3) the statute of limitation barred all of the claims. The U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation in favor of dismissal, and the District Court Judge affirmed and adopted this report and recommendation in its entirety.
