Allison v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline, Tex: Court of Appeals, 14th Dist. 2012 – Google Scholar.
The Texas Court of Appeals has affirmed a suspension for a lawyer who missed deadlines in an immigration matter and whose client was deported as a result. This is a case where a lawyer’s neglect of a matter results in professional discipline. The court rejected the lawyer’s argument that the client was difficult to reach.
The rule is quoted below:
This is a dispute between an insurer and the lawyers who were hired to defend a case. Illinois has recognized that an insurance company has a right to sue defense counsel for malpractice. Illinois has never decided whether to allow an excess insurer to bring such a lawsuit.
Foster v. WESTCHESTER FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Dist. Court, WD Pennsylvania 2012 – Google Scholar.
This is a dispute between a lawyer and his legal malpractice insurer. One of the major trends in recent years is the coverage lawsuit filed by the insurance company against the lawyer. Legal malpractice insurance is usually purchased for a one-year period. The insurer agrees to indemnify and defend the insured against any and all claims arising in that year and only that year. The policies are known as “claims made” policies, which means the insurance company must receive the claim during the policy period or there is no coverage.
Miranda v. Said, Iowa: Court of Appeals 2012 – Google Scholar.
This is an unusual case – legal malpractice in the immigration setting. Plaintiffs won a verdict at the trial but appealed on the grounds that the trial court wrongfully barred their claims for mental distress damages, punitive damages and lost chance damages.
This is a disciplinary case against Herbert Arthur Bates, an attorney in Illinois. Bates was retained by a convicted criminal to handle his appeal. Bates was paid $10,000. Unfortunately, he missed numerous deadlines and the appeal was dismissed. He also failed to return the transcripts to the inmate so the inmate could do the appeal by himself. The ARDC Hearing Board recommended a suspension of eighteen months. Bates ultimately refunded the money he was paid to handle the appeal.
The Panel explains:
Royster v. McNamara, 723 SE 2d 122 – NC: Court of Appeals 2012 – Google Scholar.
This is a legal malpractice case arising out of a litigation matter. The plaintiff, Royster, was a defendant in the underlying case, a fraud case.
Huber v. MUES, 2012 Ohio 2540 – Ohio: Court of Appeals, 2nd Appellate Dist. 2012 – Google Scholar.
This case would have been timely in Illinois, or many other states, but it was filed in Ohio, which has a one-year statute of limitations for legal malpractice.
Ohio does observe the discovery rule: “Claims arising out of an attorney’s representation are legal malpractice claims regardless of how they are pled. Katz, Teller, Brant & Hild, L.P.A. v. Farra, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 24093, 2011-Ohio-1985, ¶ 13. Therefore, Huber cannot avoid the statute of limitation by characterizing his claim as alleging ordinary negligence.
Dombrowski v. Bulson, 2012 NY Slip Op 4203 – NY: Court of Appeals 2012 – Google Scholar.
This case arose out of a dispute between a client suing his former criminal defense attorney. The Court noted that New York has rejected nonpecuniary damages in malpractice in civil cases. It came to the same conclusion for legal malpractice in criminal cases:
“New York courts that have been confronted with the issue have generally rejected the claim that a plaintiff in a legal malpractice action is entitled to nonpecuniary damages arising out of representation in civil proceedings (see e.g. Dirito v Stanley, 203 AD2d 903, 904 [4th Dept 1994] [affirming dismissal of damages claim for emotional pain and suffering]; Wolkstein v Morgenstern, 275 AD2d 635, 637 [1st Dept 2000] [“A cause of action for legal malpractice does not afford recovery for any item of damages other than pecuniary loss so there can be no recovery for emotional or psychological injury”])….
Cullinan v. FEHRENBACHER, Ill: Appellate Court 2012 – Google Scholar.
This case alleges malpractice. It is unusual because the defendants moved for a stay of the case. A stay stops the proceedings dead in their tracks. The defendants filed this motion because the alleged malpractice arose out of estate planning and the plaintiff was a party to other lawsuits (with family members and other heirs) involving that estate planning. The Court held that it had appellate jurisdiction over the motion for a stay of proceedings.
The Appellate Court held that the trial court properly denied the motion for stay of proceedings.
The caption of this case is Evanston Insurance Company v. Riseborough and Jacobson and Riseborough, 1-10-2660.
The opinion is not available online or on the website of the Appellate Court. I learned of this case when I read an excellent article by the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin. I am amazed that an opinion of this importance is not published or easily available. I had to send someone to the Appellate Court clerk’s office to obtain a copy of the opinion.
The case is of importance because it holds that the legal malpractice statute of limitations does not apply to a suit brought by a non-client against an attorney arising out of the performance of professional services.
Chicago Legal Malpractice Lawyer Blog