Five Malpractice Lawyers Projects For Any Budget

How to Sue Your Attorney for Malpractice

If you want to sue your attorney for malpractice, you must prove that the breach of duty led to legal, monetary or other negative outcomes for you. It is not enough to show that the negligence of your attorney was injurious but you must also prove an unambiguous link between the breach and the negative outcome.

The nuances of strategy don't constitute legal malpractice, however, if your lawyer does not file a lawsuit within the timeframe and you lose the case, that could be a form of malpractice.

The misuse of funds

One of the most frequent types of legal malpractice is the misuse by a lawyer of funds. Lawyers have a fiduciary connection with their clients and are expected to act with a high level of trust and fidelity, especially when dealing with money or other property that the client has entrusted to them.

When a client makes retainer to their lawyer, the lawyer is required to put the money into a separate escrow account that is specifically destined for the purpose of the case only. If the lawyer co-mingles the account with their own personal funds or utilizes it for other purposes that is a clear breach of fiduciary duty, and could be considered legal misconduct.

Imagine, for instance the scenario where a client hires an attorney to represent him in a lawsuit against a driver who was struck by them as they crossed the street. The client has proof that the driver was negligent and can prove that the collision caused their injuries. However, their lawyer is not aware of the statute of limitations and is not able to file the case in time. Thus, the lawsuit is dismissed and the victim suffers financial loss because of the lawyer's mistake.

A statute of limitation limits the time that you can pursue a lawyer's malpractice. It can be difficult to determine when the loss or injury was caused by negligence of the lawyer. A reputable New York attorney with experience in the field of malpractice law will be able to explain the time limit to you and assist you to determine if your case is a suitable candidate for a legal malpractice lawsuit.

Failure to adhere to the rules of professional conduct

Legal malpractice occurs when an attorney does not adhere to the generally accepted professional standards and causes harm to the client. It is required to meet the four components of the most common torts: an attorney-client relation as well as breach of duty and proximate cause.

Some common instances of malpractice include a lawyer who has a personal and trust account funds, failing to timely make a claim within the timeframe of the statute of limitations, taking on cases in which they aren't competent, not performing a proper conflict check, as well as not keeping up-to-date on court proceedings or new developments in law that could affect the case. Lawyers also have a responsibility to communicate with clients in a reasonable manner. This includes not just email and faxes but also resolving telephone calls promptly.

Attorneys can also commit fraud. This could be accomplished by lying to the client or any other person who is involved in the investigation. In this instance, it is important to have the facts on the hands of the investigator to determine if the attorney was deceitful. It's also a violation of the attorney-client contract if an attorney accepts cases that are outside of their expertise and does not inform the client of this or suggest that they seek separate counsel.

Failure to provide advice

When a client employs an attorney, it means they have reached the point at which their legal situation is beyond their ability and experience and that they can no longer resolve it on their own. Lawyers are required to inform clients of the advantages of the case, the potential risks and costs involved, as well as their rights. If a lawyer fails to perform this, they could be guilty of malpractice.

Many legal malpractice claims stem from of poor communication between attorneys, and their clients. Attorneys may not respond to phone call or fail to inform their clients of a specific decision that they have made on their behalf. An attorney might also neglect to communicate important details about the case or fail divulge any issues with transactions.

It is possible to claim a lawyer's malpractice, but a client must show that they were able to recover financial losses as a result of the negligence of the lawyer. These losses must be documented. This requires evidence, such as client files and emails or other correspondence between an attorney and a client as well bills. In cases of fraud or theft an expert witness might be required to examine the case.

Failure to Follow the Law

Attorneys must adhere to the law and understand what it means in specific circumstances. If they don't then they could be accused of misconduct. Examples include mixing client funds with their own or using settlement proceeds for personal expenses, and failing to exercise basic due diligence.

Another instance of legal misconduct is the failure to file an action within the statute of limitations, failing to meet deadlines for filing with the court, and not following the Rules of Professional Conduct. Attorneys are also obligated to disclose any significant conflicts of interests. They must disclose to clients any financial or personal interest that might affect their judgment when representing them.

Attorneys are also required to comply with the directions of their clients. If a customer instructs the attorney to take specific actions the attorney must comply with the instructions, unless there's any reason that suggests it is not beneficial or even feasible.

To win a malpractice lawsuit the plaintiff must prove that the lawyer violated his duty of care. This can be difficult since it requires proving the defendant's actions or negligence caused damages. It's also not enough to show that the result of the negligence of the attorney was bad to be able to prove a malpractice lawsuits claim. to be successful, it has to be demonstrated that there's an extremely high chance that the plaintiff would have prevailed should the defendant followed the usual procedure.