A jury handed down a verdict in a Mississippi legal malpractice case this week.  The case involves the familiar fact pattern of an attorney failing to file suit prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations.  But even worse, it appears the attorney didn't tell the client that the case was dismissed until several months (or even years) after the fact.

Let this be a lesson in what not to do.  I often say that people are forgiving as long as they are told what's going on.  Many of the people that seek to hire us don't do it because they were harmed, but because of the way they were treated after they were harmed.  They come because their prior attorney quit returning their calls, lied to them or otherwise tried to cover up the mistakes.  I remain firmly convinced that an attorney admitting the mistakes and offering an apology is the best way to prevent an impending legal malpractice claim. 

The Wall Street Journal Law Blog is reporting on a costly missed deadline. Morrison Foerster, one of the largest law firms in the country, obtained a judgment on behalf of its client, Toshiba America. The judge gave Toshiba 14 days to submit a motion for attorneys’ fees. Unfortunately for the firm, the firm’s courier became stuck in traffic and was 1 minute late in filing the motion. As a result, the application for approximately $1 million in attorneys’ fees was denied. A copy of the order is here.

In addition to the deadline issue, the case also presents questions about how to proceed in lawsuits. Looking at the underlying facts, it appears that Toshiba spent $996,865.83 in attorneys’ fees to obtain a recovery of $482,430.00. There are a lot things we don’t know (Was this case important for non-economic reasons? Was the agreement a contingent fee agreement? etc), but it appears there are other questions there for Toshiba to look at.

Legal malpractice cases can arise from any number of unusual situations. A legal malpractice trial started late last week against the Philadelphia firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, a 1,400+ lawyer firm. In that case, the firm is being sued by former client Purolite Corp.

According to the allegations in the lawsuit, Purolite sought advice from the firm on whether Purolite’s foreign subsidiaries could legally sell to a Cuban company. According to the company, the law firm told them that since the subsidiaries were foreign, there was no U.S. involvement and the sales were legal.

The United States disagreed. In 1996, the U.S. Customs Service began investigating the company, and the company was later indicted for making illegal trades to Cuba.

The legal malpractice trial now starts, and the jury will be asked to determine what advice the firm gave the company and whether that advice was proper.

Andrew Bluestone reports in his New York Attorney Malpractice Blog that Weil Gotshal has been sued by a Dallas businessman who claims that the firm took advantage of him while the man was undergoing cancer treatment. You can read more about the case on Bluestone’s post.