holding that the trial court’s grant of summary judgment was the right result, even though the trial court announced a wrong reason
How later courts described this case
- holding that the trial court’s grant of summary judgment was the right result, even though the trial court announced a wrong reason
- affirming summary judgment to attorney in legal malpractice case alleging attorney should have included buy-out provision when revising partnership agreement because attorney was hired only to clarify ownership of a life insurance policy and not to review entire agreement
- lawyer hired to revise a partnership agreement for tax purposes did not have a duty to insert or recommend a buy-out provision to ensure resolution of a dispute in the event a partner was removed
- affirming the circuit court where it reaches the right result but for the wrong reason
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Tom Glaze, Justice, concurring. I agree with the majority opinion, but do so solely on the rationale contained in Goldsby v. Fairley, 309 Ark. 380 , 831 S.W.2d 142 (1982), and Wright v. Compton, Prewitt, Thomas & Hickey, 315 Ark. 213 , 866 S.W.2d 387 (1993).
Brown, J., joins this opinion.