Knutson

Knutson v. Foster

Good Law
236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 473·25 Cal. App. 5th 1075
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 8, 2018G054247California8,089 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Fybel, J.

*1078 INTRODUCTION

After a three-week trial, the jury found in favor of Dagny Knutson on her fraudulent concealment and intentional breach of fiduciary duty claims against her former attorney, Richard J. Foster, and awarded her economic and noneconomic damages. The trial court granted Foster's motion for a new trial on the grounds that Knutson did not prove Foster's conduct was the cause of Knutson's damages and that Knutson had failed to offer substantial evidence of her emotional distress damages.

We reverse and reinstate the jury's verdict because the motion for a new trial was granted on erroneous legal theories. We partially publish this opinion for two reasons. First, we hold that claims of fraudulent concealment and intentional breach of fiduciary duty by a client against his or her attorney are subject to the substantial factor causation standard, not the "but for" or *1079 "trial within a trial" causation standard employed in cases of legal malpractice based on negligence. The fact that an attorney-client relationship existed between the plaintiff and the defendant does not change the method by which the plaintiff must establish causation in cases of intentional…

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.