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

In Late June 2006, The Illinois Supreme Court limited the types of damages that a client could receive from lawyers who botch a lawsuit. It was a 4-3 decision in this first-of-its-kind case that helps lawyers that are being accused of malpractice. The Court ruled that a client may sue their lawyer for the standard, compensatory damages that could have won the case, only if their suit had been properly represented.

Major votes stated that the client, however, could not sue for the punitive damages which often are awarded to punish a defendant for intentional misconduct.

Lawyers should pay for their negligence, but to hold them responsible for the intentional misconduct of someone else "tears the concept of punitive damages from its doctrinal moorings," Karmeier wrote

.

An opposind opinion, Justice Charles Freeman states that the decision was a "gross injustice".

I feel that in todays world you can sue anyone for just about anything. So when will the madness end. If we keep this up no one will be held liable for anything. So i think that this is good for the lawyers to have some protection; afterall, if they do their best to represent their client then they have successfully done their job. Unfortunately their has to be a winner and a loser.

to read more opinions on the malpractice case click here.