Merenda

Merenda v. Superior Court

Bad Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 96·3 Cal. App. 4th 1·4 Cal. Rptr. 2d 87·92 Daily Journal DAR 1528·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 944
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 30, 1992C011100California4,960 words

Opinion

Opinion

Puglia, J.

— Petitioner (plaintiff) seeks a writ of mandate compelling respondent superior court to vacate an order granting the motion of the real parties in interest (defendants) for summary adjudication of issues, and to enter a new order denying that motion. Plaintiff is suing defendants, who are attorneys, in respondent superior court for legal malpractice. Defendants moved in that action for summary adjudication of two issues: whether in an action for legal malpractice, plaintiff may recover (1) emotional distress damages resulting directly from the attorneys’ negligence, and (2) compensatory damages in the amount of the punitive damages plaintiff would have obtained but for the attorneys’ negligence causing the discharge in bankruptcy of a claim against a third party.

We shall conclude that plaintiff cannot recover damages for emotional distress suffered as a result of defendants’ negligent legal malpractice, but can recover as compensatory damages the amount she would have received as punitive damages on the discharged claim against the third party.

Plaintiff’s complaint alleges she hired defendants to represent her in an action to recover damages from her former employer,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.