Legal Malpractice

Sacramento Legal Malpractice Attorney

It is probably a bad sign when your lawyer has to get a lawyer.

Most attorneys take their ethical and moral responsibilities toward their client seriously. Others are the kinds of cheats that give the profession a bad reputation. What people do not always realize is that strong protections are in place for people who have been harmed by legal malpractice.

Legal malpractice is often a shorthand for one or all of five distinct claims that can be brought against an attorney.

First, there is actual legal malpractice. This is a type of negligence claim that can be brought against an attorney. To prove legal malpractice, the client needs to show (a) that the attorney owed a duty of care to the client, (b) that the attorney breached that duty of care, (c) that the client suffered damages, (d) that the attorney's breach of the owed duty factually caused the client's damages, and (e) that the attorney's breach of the owed duty proximately caused the client's damages.

Attorneys owe a duty of care to represent their clients with a reasonable standard of care. The difficulty in proving a legal malpractice case usually centers on causation. For factual causation, the client needs to show that the attorney's breach of duty factually contributed to the damage. For instance, an attorney fails to file a lawsuit within the statute of limitations, which then prevents the client from pursuing their claim. Had the attorney done what they were supposed to, the client may have recovered. Thus, the attorney's failure factually caused the client's damages. For proximate causation, the damages need to be the reasonably foreseeable consequence of the attorney's breach of duty. For example, let us suppose the attorney did not file the case on time, and the client is prevented from pursuing their claim. While on the way to consult with a Sacramento legal malpractice attorney about this, the client is struck by lightning and hospitalized. Here, there is factual causation. Had the attorney done what they were supposed to, the client would not have been coming to see us and would not have been struck by lightning. But getting struck by lightning is not a reasonably foreseeable consequence of failing to file a lawsuit on time, so the client would not be able to recover for these damages from the negligent attorney.

Another complication can arise in that prevailing on a legal malpractice claim often means having to prove that the client would have won their original case. If the attorney did not file a lawsuit on time, but the client was doomed to lose from the beginning, the client suffered no damages, and the negligent attorney is not liable. The standard in criminal cases is far harsher. Even if the client can prove that they would have gotten a better outcome in their criminal case, such as a lighter sentence or a conviction on a lesser crime, the client cannot prevail against their attorney for malpractice unless the client proves they are innocent in their criminal case.

The second claim that is included when people talk about "legal malpractice" is known as breach of fiduciary duty. The attorney-client relationship is not a normal business transaction. Instead, the attorney owes a duty to the client to prioritize the client's interests above their own. For example, if two people who work together have a conversation, and one of them reveals that they are on the edge of bankruptcy, the other person could offer to buy their home or second vehicle at a steep discount. Knowing that the bankrupt person needs the cash, the buyer can take advantage of the situation and push a tougher bargain. That may not be a nice thing to do, but they could. If your attorney did something like that, though, they would be breaching a duty owed to you. That would (a) be information that was likely confidential, and (b) is a transaction that benefits themselves at your expense.

The third claim that is included when people talk about "legal malpractice" is breach of contract. If you have a contract with your attorney that requires them to do something, and they do not do what is required, they breached the contract.

The fourth claim that is included when people talk about "legal malpractice" is known as conversion. Conversion is the civil equivalent of stealing. This issue comes up a lot with client trust accounts. Some fee agreements require clients to deposit money with an attorney, who will then bill against that deposit for work that is done. When the deposit is depleted, the attorney will ask for more money to be placed on deposit. When the case is concluded or the relationship ends, any unearned money on deposit has to be returned to the client. Attorneys are required to keep these deposits in special bank accounts known as trust accounts. What happens if the attorney just keeps the money? That is conversion, or stealing. Money in the trust account is not the attorney's property; it is the client's. By taking that money out of the trust account and keeping it without having earned it, the attorney has stolen it.

The final claim that is included when people talk about "legal malpractice" is known as fraud. To prove fraud, the client must show: (a) that the attorney represented to the client that a fact was true; (b) that the attorney's representation was false; (c) that the attorney either knew the representation was false when they made it, or that they made it recklessly and without regard for its truth; (d) that the attorney intended that the client rely on the representation; (e) that the client reasonably relied on the attorney's representation; (f) that the client was harmed; and, (g) that the client's reliance on the representation was a substantial factor in causing that harm. For example, you approach an attorney because you believe you have a claim. The attorney thinks you do not have a claim. But, the attorney tells you that you definitely do have a claim. In telling you this, the attorney is hoping you will pay them for legal services. You are not an attorney, and the attorney telling you this has handled cases like yours before, so you believe them. So, based on that, you pay the attorney for legal services. But because you had no claim, you just wasted all that money. If you have made it this far, you will see that not only does that constitute fraud, but it constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty because the attorney also got you to enter into a transaction that was in the attorney's best interest but not yours. This is why a Sacramento legal malpractice attorney is essential for identifying all of the claims you may have in your case.