Plaintiffs lacked prudential standing to assert claims because their complaint alleged only damages suffered by non-party companies.

The district court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss in an action asserting claims for breach of fiduciary duty and legal malpractice. The court found that the plaintiffs lacked prudential standing to assert any of the claims because the complaint alleged only damages suffered by non-party companies.

_{Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2023 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}