Fraudulent Lawyer

[icewaterswimmer]

What is the name of your state? Illinois

In a civil suit as the plaintiff, the defendants filed a motion for summary judgement. I had no knowledge of this motion, was never advised by my attorney what this motion could mean and had no participation in resisting the motion. Also my attorney has no accounting of the $7,000 paid to the law firm as retainers. Doesn't my attorney has the responsibility to inform me of anything that is going on in my case. As I found out later, my attorney didn't even write the resistance brief. He gave it to a young attorney in the firm. I never met with him. He didn't know my case. He didn't include crucial material facts in the resistance brief, the reasons why the suit was filed in the first place. The material facts I speak of are all in depostions and recorded testimony. Left out of brief! Please advise if you can Thank You!What is the name of your state?

[ALawyer]

In most law firms, the senior lawyers delegate much of the work -- and in some cases all of it -- to the more junior lawyers. This is done for purposes of efficiency and cost-effectiveness. By the same token, a top surgeon may perform the critical part of the surgery with the junior surgeons -- often residents in training -- handling the rest after top docs have left. That alone is no basis for serious complaint.

POSSIBLY more important is the fact that you were not informed of material developments in the case.

If a motion for summary judgment was made essentially the movant claims there are no material facts in dispute and the issue is properly decided as a matter of law. There are 2 ways to defend against it. One, your side may agree that the the only issue is purely legal and the reply brief should only address the legal issue(s), such as did the statute of limitations run? or was the clause in the lease lawful? or was product recall required by law? In such a case your side may also seek summary judgment if the facts are agreed upon. You could pprobably add little to that.

The second way to defend against a motion for summary judgment is by claiming that there are facts in dispute and a trial is needed so the jury can deceide who is credible or whose version of the facts is correct, and thus summary judgment is inappropriate. In that case if you were consulted you might have had some input. (Unlikely, but possible.)

In any legal malpractice case the plaintiff has to be able to prove that BUT FOR the lawyer's malpractice s/he would have won the case and then quantify the damages. Too often a case that looks good to start turns out to be less attractive as things go on. The other driver does not have insurance, or was excluded from the policy. The defendant has no assets. The drug did have a warning label. The plaintiff's injuries were below the no-faut threshold. The wife's twin was in the motel room. The partnership agreement required notice that was not sent, etc. When a lawyer thinks the case is a loser, perhaps because the client "over-sold" it, the lawyer's level of attention wanes. Lawyers are often human.

Lawyers who screw up on cases that are going to be losers, have no civil liability. There may be some ethical issues, and there are client relationship issues, but that does not put money in your pocket.