Three Ways To Prevent Litigation Malpractice
There are many simple risk management techniques that can be taken by any litigation practitioner that can significantly help prevent common legal malpractice claims.
January 07, 2022 at 02:30 PM
8 minute read
Legal MalpracticeA legal malpractice claim can be disconcerting, time consuming, expensive, and disruptive to a litigation attorney's practice, but there are many simple risk management techniques that can be taken by any litigation practitioner that can significantly help prevent common legal malpractice claims.
Every few years, the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Lawyers' Professional Liability conducts a survey of legal malpractice claims. According to the most recent survey conducted in 2019, issues related to client relations, which include the failure to follow client's instruction, failure to obtain consent and/or inform the client, and improper withdrawal from representation, account for 16.70% of all legal malpractice claims. As such, the simple act of improving client relations can significantly reduce an attorney's chances of having a legal malpractice claim brought against her.
One of the most effective ways to improve client relations is through the strategic use of engagement letters or retainer agreements. Engagement letters and retainer agreements are useful tools that can significantly help prevent legal malpractice claims. Engagement letters should not be boiler-plate agreements that simply and broadly state the nature of the representation and the fee that will be charged. The most effective engagement letters for the purposes of risk management, client relations, and the reduction of exposure to legal malpractice claims are detailed agreements that define the scope of the representation, define anything specifically known to be outside the scope of the representation, advise the client of the specific costs and fees to be charged, provide the client with a budget and a timeline for the matter, among other issues important to the particular matter. Such detailed engagement letters can significantly help eliminate misunderstandings over these issues, which can otherwise lead to malpractice claims.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTurning the Tables: Defense Litigators Embrace Lawsuits, Alleging Fraud at Plaintiffs Shops
6 minute readPracticing New York Attorney Found Liable for $26 Million for Exploitation of Client
Disbarred Lawyer Is Sentenced to Prison for Role in Deed Fraud Scheme
Covington Hit With Crypto Inventor's Legal Malpractice Suit Seeking $100M
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
- 5Data-Driven Legal Strategies
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250