Saadeh v. Connors
Saadeh v. Connors , 166 So.3d 959 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) In this portion of the Saadeh guardianship saga, the court was asked to determine whether an attorney representing a court-appointed guardian in a guardianship proceeding owes a duty to the ward under a third-party beneficiary theory. The Court ultimately found that it did. This case began with an emergency temporary guardianship proceeding, in which a court-appointed attorney was appointed to represent the alleged incapacitated person, a professional guardian was appointed, and that guardian had his own counsel. As part of an "agreed" order to "settle" the guardianship, the court entered an ordered agreeing that the alleged incapacitated person would execute a trust instead of a plenary guardianship. The agreed order did not settle the matter, unfortunately, and the litigation continued. Eventually, the alleged incapacitated person was found competent and brought suit against multiple players in th