As among the few attorneys who is willing to take on a case for 100 % legal negligence or legal malpractice, I receive calls on a regular basis from potential clients who are dissatisfied with their prior attorney. Lots of calls deal with poor communication between the attorney and prospect and could have easily been cured if the attorney should bedside manner. Many other calls are simply the result of the discouragement that people have with the legal system and the claims production process in general. With that being said, attorneys do commit malpractice and damage their clients.
In order to succeed on a claim for appropriate malpractice, a client must prove that the attorney breached the traditional of care. The “standard of care” is an object standard, which means that degree of skill and learning ordinarily put to use under the same or similar circumstances by members with the legal profession. Exactly what this means is, of course , the heart of your issue in any legal negligence claim. Simply put, lawyers infringement the standard of care when they fail to do that which other lawyer in their situation would have done.
Sometimes it is easy to point out a breach in the standard of care, such as because a lawyer misses the statute of limitations. Other times, it’s not necessarily so simple. For instance, perhaps the attorney failed to introduce necessary evidence at trial; however , how does the client show that introduction of this evidence would have changed the result? This studies has to come from expert testimony whereby another attorney opines, to a reasonable degree of legal certainty, that “but for” the exclusion of evidence, the client would have prevailed (or a different result would’ve been achieved). Know more about Hamilton Lindley Former Lawyer at Provost Umphrey Law Firm, LLP
For obvious arguments, this is a very difficult threshold to overcome for a client suing his former attorney for legal malpractice. First, bigger to show that “but for” this breach of the conventional of care, a different result would have been achieved. In view that we do not have a crystal ball, this can be a difficult burden. Minute, in order to submit this evidence, the client must hire a further attorney to act as a legal expert to give such an point of view. As you can appreciate, finding another attorney to testify from his or her colleague is, at best, difficult. Moreover, legal pros do not work for free and often charge high hourly plans to review a case file, prepare and testify regarding most of their opinions.
These are some of the reasons why making a claim against your company attorney for legal malpractice is so difficult. Moreover, when I’ve written previously in my blog, just because an attorney does malpractice, doesn’t mean that the client has suffered any ruin. Indeed, without damages there is no recovery, nor is it financially feasible to pursue such a claim.