Glickman & Glickman
Get the legal help you need
310-746-5116
Map & Directions Contact Us

Los Angeles Professional Malpractice Law Blog

Spotlighting CA attorney behavior leading to disbarment

The State Bar of California has a bag of tools that personify well a proverbial carrot-and-stick approach.

On the one hand, many individuals who apply themselves diligently during an arduous period of study are rewarded with a coveted professional license to practice law in the state.

What is the most common legal malpractice claim?

Attorneys in California and elsewhere whose client representation results in claims of legal malpractice commit a variety of sins. Some of their shortcomings that spawn client harm include these lapses from the professional standard of care governing their profession:

  • Conflicts of interest (e.g., simultaneous advocacy of two adverse parties in the same matter, or representation in a case involving the attorney’s own adverse interests)
  • Ethics violations (for example, failing to properly communicate with a client, or breaching a confidential matter)
  • Inadequate knowledge of the applicable law in a case
  • Wrongly pushing litigation (filing lawsuits without a reasonable basis for doing so)

How can a CA resident steer clear of a bad-faith attorney?

Sometimes it takes a bit of proactive doing.

That is the bottom line applicable in select instances where a would-be or actual California client has strong misgivings about whether an attorney is acting competently and ethically or deceptively and in bad faith.

CA State Bar matter spotlights attorney’s trust account violation

Attorney conduct in California that falls below a designated standard of care for clients covers a lot of ground.

A lawyer’s performance can harm a client when it proceeds from a clear conflict of interest (for example, simultaneous representation of another party with competing interests in the same matter). California attorneys’ laxity sometimes yields missed court filings or other deadlines that are critically important in a case. The relevant law in a matter might simply be misunderstood or misapplied by retained legal counsel, to a trusting client’s detriment.

When does a CA client have a valid concern re a lawyer’s billing?

As a long-established and proven legal malpractice law firm that exclusively represents aggrieved clients of California attorneys, we cut straight to the chase concerning lawyers’ billing duties.

In doing so, we note at Glickman & Glickman that the answer to today’s above-posed blog headline is both clear and direct.

Court cites plaintiff’s laxity in pursuing legal malpractice claim

We pose a pointed question to California readers of our legal malpractice blog at the long-established Los Angeles law firm of Glickman & Glickman.

We directly ask this on a relevant website page: “Were you a victim of your attorney’s malpractice?”

Key legal malpractice factor spotlighted: the “but for” element

Say that you’re a California resident having what you reasonably believe to be a strong legal claim against a third party for some alleged act of wrongdoing that caused you harm.

Notwithstanding the strong merits underlying your lawsuit, you lose the case. The only reason that you can come up with to remotely explain why your claim was defeated is the clearly deficient legal representation your retained attorney provided in the matter.

Here’s an obvious malpractice concern for CA legal regulators

Message from the California State Bar to practicing attorneys across the state: client money remitted in reliance on your legal representation better be going to you, not a non-attorney.

Fee splitting is akin to a dirty word and spells a reproachable practice to state regulators when it pertains to client funds relevant to a case matter that go to both retained counsel and a nonlawyer third party.

Plaintiffs respond to law firm’s representation with a lawsuit

Spokespersons for national law firm Jones Day unsurprisingly term the volunteer work that firm attorneys do on a so-called “pro bono” basis as routinely first-rate and even exceptional.

Two individuals who recently filed a lawsuit against the firm in a Southern California state court beg to differ. Their complaint alleges that Jones Day representation in their pro bono matter left them destitute and homeless.

Contact us now to begin speaking with an attorney:

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

Privacy Policy