Shareholder clients sued lawyer for alleged legal malpractice in connection with dispute over control of an insurance company. The instruction to the jury had stated that “a lawyer cannot be held responsible for errors in judgment for advising a course of action even if that course of action ultimately proves to be unsuccessful.” Id. at *2. The Kentucky Supreme Court held that this instruction misstates the standard for legal malpractice in Kentucky. The court went on to hold that a proper jury instruction would have focused on the duty of a lawyer to “exercise the degree of care and skill expected of a reasonably competent lawyer under similar circumstances” and not allow lawyers to avoid liability for errors in judgment which the average prudent lawyer would not commit. Id. at *3.