Schreier v. Drealan Kvilhaug Hoefker & Co., No. 20-1731 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to HHW and DKH in an action brought by plaintiff, alleging professional malpractice and negligence. The court concluded that the district court did not err in ruling that the "Q" deduction did not apply to the estate return in January 2013, and DKH was not professionally negligent in failing to claim the deduction. Furthermore, the district court did not err in ruling that a certified public accountant was not negligent in failing to wait to file the return until the amendment was enacted.
The court also concluded that the district court properly granted summary judgment on plaintiff's legal malpractice claim; the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to sua sponte extend discovery deadlines to allow plaintiff to submit another expert affidavit; and the district court properly granted summary judgment on the aiding and abetting claim, as well as the RICO claim. Finally, the district court did not err in ruling that questions -- regarding whether an individual, who was not a party in this case, breached a fiduciary duty and whether the district court should declare specific rental rates -- were not at issue and denying summary judgment.
Court Description: [Benton, Author, with Loken and Colloton, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Professional malpractice. In action claiming accountant committed professional malpractice by not claiming a state tax deduction, the district court did not err in ruling, based on the language of the statute in question, that the deduction did not apply at the time the return was filed, and it did not err in granting defendant summary judgment on the claim; the affidavit submitted in support of plaintiff's legal malpractice claim was insufficient, and the district court did not err in granting the defendant law firm summary judgment; plaintiff's aiding and abetting claim was was not supported by the record, and the court did not err in granting defendants summary judgment; RICO claim was properly dismissed as untimely.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.