Lerner v. Laufer

Facts

Lynne and Michael Lerner were married for 24 years when Michael filed for divorce in 1994. The couple had amassed considerable wealth, including valuable interests in a clothing company called Marisa Christina. They engaged Brett Meyer, a New York attorney who was a family friend, to mediate their divorce settlement. After several mediation sessions, a comprehensive PSA was drafted. Meyer provided Lynne with a list of New Jersey attorneys to consult before signing the agreement.

Lynne selected William Laufer from this list. Before their first in-person meeting on February 2, 1994, Laufer prepared a detailed letter explicitly stating the limitations of his representation. The letter specified that Laufer had not conducted any discovery, had not reviewed financial documentation, had not verified Michael’s income, and had not appraised any properties or business interests. The letter stated that Laufer was “not in a position to advise you as to whether or not the Agreement is fair and equitable and whether or not you should execute the Agreement as prepared.” Lynne read and signed this letter.

After reviewing the PSA with Lynne, Laufer suggested some modifications, some of which were adopted. The divorce was granted in April 1994, with the PSA incorporated into the final judgment. Later, Lynne discovered that Marisa Christina was preparing for an initial public offering, contrary to representations allegedly made during mediation. She successfully had the divorce judgment vacated, though the judge took “no position” on the validity of the PSA. After further mediation, a second amended PSA was agreed upon, and a second divorce was granted in 1999.

In September 1999, Lynne sued Laufer for malpractice, alleging he had failed to conduct appropriate discovery, failed to retain experts to value assets, and failed to properly evaluate her entitlement to alimony and equitable distribution.