Reed

INTRODUCTION

Attorney Zshonette Reed and the firm of Lorden & Reed (collectively “Reed”) sued Tu My Tong (“Tong”) based upon Tong’s failure to pay for legal services rendered by Reed. After Reed prevailed at trial on a quantum meruit theory, Tong appealed, contending that the trial court had erroneously denied her motion for leave to file a compulsory cross-complaint. In an unpublished decision, we reversed the judgment to permit Tong to file her compulsory cross-complaint. (Reed v. Tong, November 17, 2010, B212743 [nonpub. opn] (Reed I).) However, we qualified the reversal with the following directions: If Reed was successful in obtaining a pretrial dismissal of the cross-complaint, the trial court was to reinstate Reed’s judgment on the quantum meruit action. If, however, Tong’s cross- complaint survived pretrial litigation, the trial court was to conduct a new trial on Reed’s complaint and Tong’s cross-complaint. (Ibid.) On remand, Tong was permitted to file a cross-complaint alleging causes of action for breach of contract, declaratory relief, and legal malpractice. On the first day of trial, Tong indicated that she did not have an expert witness to testify in support of her…