Quote:
Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan
I have a friend who is a lawyer malpractice lawyer. He's a super nice guy and I always have to remind myself what he does because it seems so different from his personality. I do see some pretty egregious stuff from lawyers from time to time, but nothing that I'd recommend him for. His stories are usually pretty jaw dropping.
I deal with the doctor malpractice lawyers a lot more often.
|
Real, valid legal malpractice cases are rare. To prove one, plaintiff has to prove it'd have enjoyed a positive result but for the negligence (prove the claimant would have won its case, in an instance of alleged litigation malpractice). Usually difficult.
The guys who do it that I've encountered aren't terribly discerning. I think most have to take a high volume of cases, many dubious, to keep the lights on. The business model seems to be shaking down the law firm to see if it'll cough up a settlement and if not, then getting a sleazy expert to state that the claimant definitely would have won the case but for the alleged negligence. It's so speculative, except in real cut and dry instances (truly egregious failures) the expert is basically fictionalizing a future which probably would not have occurred.
I refuse to refer people who want to make legal malpractice claims. I've sold enough of my soul for money. I can't get into that sewer for a referral fee.
ETA: I'm already doomed to hell for having been involved in med mal work long ago.
