Martin Clearwater & Bell LLP believes that the defense of another professional is a sensitive matter. MCB has extensive experience serving as counsel to other professionals, including:
• officers and directors
• insurance professionals
MCB attorneys have represented professionals in both State and Federal courts in diverse matters including design and construction controversies, RICO and fraud investigations, mortgage and financing issues, real estate syndication matters and other areas of business and the law, and, of course, underlying medical personal injury claims.
The Firm represents insurance carriers in matters regarding their professional liability insurance coverage in both Federal and State courts, and also handles all of the related appellate practice.
The Firm represents accountants in areas involving tax preparation, audits, financial reporting and financial consulting in the real estate, computer software, financial securities, and music industries.
The Firm defends lawyers in areas involving litigation, real estate, corporate governance, criminal law, domestic relations and trusts and estates. MCB has also influenced the American Institute of Architects’ form contracts in favor of architects and engineers and helped to define the scope of liability for design professionals in construction accident cases.
MCB Result: Summary Judgment Granted.
In a federal action, Trent Reznor, the lead singer of the musical act, Nine Inch Nails, brought an action against the defendant-accountant claiming the accountant owed him a duty to accurately account for his personal and corporate income and expenses generated from his music, intellectual property and endorsements and to alert him to the fact that the singer’s management company allegedly breached its fi duciary duty to properly manage his financial affairs. MCB moved for summary judgment and argued that Reznor was not in privity with the accountant and the accountant accurately presented Reznor with information regarding the latter’s personal and corporate income and expenses. The Court granted the motion and held that there was no evidence that the defendant was Reznor’s accountant and therefore no privity between them and that the defendant did not make any material misrepresentation to Reznor upon which the singer relied to his detriment.