Silvagni v. Schorr, 113 A.3d 810 (Pa. Super. 2015). This case was based upon an attorney malpractice where it is claimed by claimant that the attorney malpracticed in the handling of a workers’ compensation claim. The claimant said that the attorney gave him incorrect legal advice that ultimately led to a compromise and release. The claimant said that but for the incorrect legal advice, he would not have agreed to the terms of the settlement. Unless the workers’ compensation claimant had specifically pled, and could prove, that the attorneys fraudulently induced him into signing the Compromise and Release Agreement, or he could prove that the attorney failed to explain the effect of that settlement, or that the settlement was somehow legally deficient, the former client is barred from maintaining an action in negligence against the lawyer. It is clear that the lawyers were entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. There was no abuse of discretion in granting the attorneys summary judgment.