Want v. Frei et al, No. 1:2016cv00660 - Document 66 (E.D. Va. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION re Motion for summary judgment. Signed by District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema on 1/23/17. Copy mailed to pro se plaintiff by chambers.(klau, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Want v. Frei et al Doc. 66 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division JEROME WANT, Plaintiff, l:16-cv-660(LMB/IDD) V. STEVEN MARK FREI, et aL, Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION PlaintiffJerome Want ("plaintiff" or "Want"), gro se, has filed a six-count complaint alleging malpractice^ and firaud byhis former attorney Steven Mark Frei ("Frei"), and Frei's law firm Sickles, Frei & Mims, P.C., (collectively with Frei, "defendants"), arising out of Frei's representation of Want in a personal injury action filed in the Arlington County Circuit Court. Plaintiff seeks damages of at least $2.59 million plus prejudgment interest at a rate of 12%. Compl. 16-23. Defendants have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment ("Motion"), to which plaintiffhas filed a response.^ The Court finds that oral argument would not aid the decisional process. For the reasons that follow, defendants' motion will be granted. ^Want divides his malpractice claim among five counts: Count 1(Failure to Provide a Minimum Standard of Care); Count 2 (Malpractice); Count 4 (Breach of Contract); Count 5 (NonFeasance); and Count 6 (Malfeasance). Compl. 16-17; 20-22. ^Although defendants served plaintiff with a Roseboro notice along with their motion, advising him that he must "identify all facts stated by Defendants with which [he] disagree[s] and set forth [his] version of the facts by offering affidavits (written statements signed before a notary public and imder oath) or by filing sworn statements (bearing a certificate that is signed under penalty ofpeijury)," plaintiffs response consists solely of argument, failing to cite any evidence in the record, see generally PI. 0pp. [Dkt. 64]. Moreover, those arguments have not been submitted imder penalty of peijury. See id. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
