Filbin

Filbin v. Fitzgerald

Bad Law
149 Cal. Rptr. 3d 422·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 1197·211 Cal. App. 4th 154
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 20, 2012No. A128544California8,102 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Richman, J.

There is a type of attorney malpractice lawsuit known as a “settle and sue” case, which involves a former client suing after litigation has been settled. Depending on whether the disgruntled client was the plaintiff or the defendant in the antecedent lawsuit, the basis of the claim is that the settlement was less than it should have been, or more than it had to be, by reason of the negligence of the party’s attorney. Obviously, the manner in which the underlying lawsuit was concluded will often make it problematic whether causation and damages can be established.

Here, the trial court awarded the former clients more than half a million dollars for the malpractice committed by their former attorney while representing them in an eminent domain proceeding. The court concluded that even though the attorney’s negligence occurred prior to the eventual settlement—a settlement they agreed to while represented by a successor attorney—various actions by the attorney were below the standard of professional care and caused the clients to settle for $574,000 less than they would otherwise have received. The court further concluded that, notwithstanding his malpractice, the former…

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.