- 21 - of Fell & Spaulding to represent them in the action on a contingency-fee basis. In their complaint, the plaintiffs sought (1) compensatory damages in the sum of $3.7 million, together with interest and costs for malpractice committed by Eckell, Sparks in connection with the drafting of the 1989 will and the antenuptial agreement (count I); (2) the sum of $340,270, together with interest and costs for attorney’s fees incurred by the Glovers in contesting the 1989 will (count II); (3) compensatory damages in the form of reimbursement of the executrix’s commissions, bequests to Ms. Hurley, and Eckell, Sparks’s attorney’s fees in the amount of $547,500, together with interest and costs for malpractice committed by Eckell, Sparks while representing decedent’s estate (count III); (4) $857,000, together with treble damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees, for conduct by Eckell, Sparks that violated the Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) (count IV); and (5) punitive damages, alleging that Eckell, Sparks’s conduct was “outrageous” and amounted to a “gross and reckless disregard of the probable consequences and the harm being inflicted on the Plaintiffs herein” (count V). On August 8, 1995, the Glovers and the administrators pro tem. entered into an agreement to provide a method for allocating any amount recovered from the lawsuit against Eckell, Sparks, as wellPage: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011