Conspiracy Requires Knowing the Co-Conspirators, Malpractice Requires Knowing the Underlying Outcome
Natalja Vildziuniene (“Vildziuniene”) sued attorney Bradley Foreman (“Foreman”) for conspiracy to commit fraud and legal malpractice. Specifically, she alleged that Foreman conspired to defraud her, breached the duty of care, and represented her in various court proceedings without her knowledge. Foreman moved successfully to dismiss these counts and Vildziuniene appealed. The Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, affirmed. With respect to the conspiracy to commit fraud, it stated that Vildziuniene’s accusations were a “mere characterization of acts as a conspiracy.” Id. at ¶47. Moreover, “there were no allegations that Foreman knew the other defendants, spoke with the other defendants, or knew anything about the allegedly fraudulent purpose behind these” supposedly fraudulent transactions. Id. at ¶50. Regarding the alleged malpractice, the Appellate Court noted that “there are no allegations as to what happened in any of the cases in that Foreman allegedly represented plaintiff” such as whether Vildziuniene even prevailed in those matters. Id. at ¶54. It was therefore impossible to ascertain whether she would have prevailed in the underlying actions but for Foreman’s negligence.
(This is for informational purposes and is not legal advice.)