Credit: Ed Hall/Artizans; LIGHTFIELD STUDIOS/Adobe Stock 
L-R Elisa Reiter and Daniel Pollack. Courtesy photos What Constitutes Malpractice by a Child Welfare Attorney?
The legal landscape and complex challenges facing today's child welfare attorney are daunting. Simply because children are involved, difficult legal situations demand the guidance of a highly qualified attorney.
May 24, 2021 at 06:53 PM
6 minute read
Attorneys are expected to adhere to high standards of professional conduct and competence and to provide representation in accordance with best practice guidelines. The term legal malpractice implies that an attorney has been negligent or has breached a fiduciary duty. This can occur in many different ways, often depending on the particular area of law in which the attorney practices. The legal landscape and complex challenges facing today's child welfare attorney are daunting. Simply because children are involved, difficult legal situations demand the guidance of a highly qualified attorney.
Adverse results are not necessarily the result of malpractice. This article provides an overview of some common malpractice mistakes that child welfare attorneys make. Among them are the following:
- Missing a filing date.
- Having a conflict of interest.
- Breaching a fiduciary duty.
- Engaging in fraud or embezzlement.
- Representing a client's wishes incorrectly or without their consent.
Texas Family Code Section 107 addresses special court appointments, including the appointment of an attorney ad litem (AAL) and/or an amicus attorney (AA). In Texas, the powers of such court-appointed counsel are subject to Rules 4.02, 4.03 and 4.04, Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct.
This content has been archived.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
© 2025 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 All
Legal Malpractice: Texas Supreme Court OKs 'Pernicious Distortion of Positions'
4 minute read
Bathroom Recording Leads to Lawyer's Disbarment: Disciplinary Roundup
6 minute read
The Buzbee Law Firm Accused of Client Abuse in Two Louisiana Lawsuits
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gunderson Dettmer Opens Atlanta Office With 3 Partners From Morris Manning
- 2Decision of the Day: Court Holds Accident with Post Driver Was 'Bizarre Occurrence,' Dismisses Action Brought Under Labor Law §240
- 3Judge Recommends Disbarment for Attorney Who Plotted to Hack Judge's Email, Phone
- 4Two Wilkinson Stekloff Associates Among Victims of DC Plane Crash
- 5Two More Victims Alleged in New Sean Combs Sex Trafficking Indictment
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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
