Author Archives: Robert Ross
Damages in Legal Malpractice: What Can an Injured Client Recover?
Damages are a mandatory element of a successful legal malpractice claim. Stated another way: if the client doesn’t suffer measurable damages (of a type recognized by law) he or she cannot successfully sue the attorney for malpractice. Although this seems strange to many people, the law says that if the lawyer’s breach of a… Read More »
The “Tactical Immunity” Doctrine in Legal (Mal)practice
As we discussed on Monday, not everything a lawyer does is subject to malpractice liability. The fact that a lawyer loses a case, or that a client does not obtain the outcome he or she wanted does not necessarily mean the lawyer committed professional negligence. While clients should seek professional counsel if they believe… Read More »
Every “Mistake” A Lawyer Makes is Not Malpractice (Part 1 of 2)
We’ve spent a lot of time on this blog discussing attorney malpractice and the legal tests to establish it. This week, we’re taking a short break to discuss some of the things that do not usually qualify as malpractice (aka “professional negligence”). The items and actions discussed this week may combine with other actions… Read More »
When Has a Lawyer Breached a Professional Duty to a Client?
To prevail in a legal malpractice claim, a plaintiff must not only prove that the defendant attorney owed the plaintiff a legal duty, but also that the lawyer behaved in a way that constitutes a legally-recognized breach of that duty. The plaintiff is usually a former client, but also may be a non-client to… Read More »
Malpractice Liability to Non-Clients: What About Other Lawyers?
The last few posts have taken a look at circumstances when courts may find an attorney liable for malpractice when the plaintiff was not the attorney’s client (or otherwise in “privity of contract” with the lawyer). Generally, an attorney only owes a professional duty of care to clients and other people with whom the… Read More »
Liability to Non-Clients, Part 3: Foreseeable Harm
California courts have held a lawyer liable to non-clients when the foreseeability of harm to those non-clients (resulting from the lawyer’s malpractice or professional negligence) outweighs the various policy considerations which normally make lawyers liable only to their clients. The question, of course, is what does it mean for harm to be “foreseeable” and… Read More »
Attorney Liability to Non-Clients, Part 2: The Intended Beneficiaries
As a general rule, attorneys can only be held liable for malpractice where the plaintiff (the injured party) was the attorney’s client at the time the malpractice occurred. However, courts have also held attorneys liable to non-clients in a narrow, specialized range of cases. One of these occurs when the person (or company) injured… Read More »
Can An Attorney Have Liability to Non-Clients?
Generally speaking, a lawyer only owes a duty of care (and thus, can only be liable for malpractice) to a client, meaning “a person with whom the lawyer had an ongoing attorney-client relationship at the time the professional negligence was committed.” However, under some rare circumstances, courts will impose a duty of care on a… Read More »
What is “Proper Attorney Diligence”?
The rules which govern attorney conduct state that a lawyer cannot accept or represent a client unless the attorney can dedicate a professionally-adequate amount of time and resources to handling and managing the client’s case or issue. This is a duty the lawyer owes to the client, and also to the justice system generally…. Read More »
A New Development in Construction Defect Liability
On July 3, 2014, the California Supreme Court issued a ruling in Beacon Residential Community Association v. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP (2014 WL 2988058) The case involved a lawsuit brought by a condominium owners’ association (essentially, a HOA) against the developer of the condominium building and the architectural firms who designed the building (along… Read More »
