Claris Law Legal Blogging Community

Name:

E-mail:

Phone Number:

Zip Code:

Your Question:

Editor: Denny Thaxton
Profession: Legal Malpractice Liability

Category: Legal Malpractice News

A very interesting ethical issue arose yesterday when I read Ben Cowgill's Blog on the Crowe vs. Tull case. The Colorado Supreme Court voted that the state's Consumer Protection Act ( CPPA) does in fact apply to Lawyer advertising,

after the fact that a client filed an action under the CPPA against his former attorneys due to their deceptive television advertising. Crowe stated that he had retained these attorneys based upon their ads. He was pressured into settling for $4000 on a $17000 medical specials and a $7000 wage loss claim due to his defendents ineptitude. The court went on to state that the Act does not create liability for those who intend to live up to the pronouncements of their ads, but rather that they neglegently fail to conform their conduct to their words.

The court stated that on the record before it, there was sufficient evidence from which a fact finder could conclude that the defendants knowingly engaged in deceptive trade practices."