To do the best job possible as a mediator, arbitrator and referee, I keep up with and summarize the new published California civil cases. In this blog I discuss a new civil case that was published last month.
I've been thinking for years that the anti-SLAPP statute (Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16) could create potential legal malpractice liability for California lawyers. Now it has. Last month, the Second District Court of Appeal published a new case addressing whether attorneys and law firms can be liable for not discussing with clients the potential risks and damages if a defendant files a successful anti-SLAPP motion to strike. In the video above I briefly discuss this new case. My summary of the case is below.
New Legal Malpractice Decision
Mireskandari v. Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP (2022) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2022 WL 1055417: The Court of Appeal reversed in part, and affirmed in part, the trial court's order granting defendants' motion...