Arizona Legal Malpractice

Patent cases are very specialized and complicated. Attorneys who do not specialize in patent law often struggle to understand its rules. The same is true for judges who have not spent their careers specializing in patent law. For that reason, a few decades ago, Congress created the Federal Circuit, a special Court of Appeals where all patent appeals go.

The federal system consists of courts administered by the national government, while state courts are administered by state governments. The Federal Circuit, the appellate court for patents, is within the federal (as opposed to the state) system of courts.

In Texas, an individual litigant sued his former law firm, on the theory that their legal malpractice had cost him victory in a patent case. Specifically, he argued that if his former attorneys had asserted a defense called “experimental use,” which they failed to assert, his patent claim would have been successful. He sued his former law firm in Texas state court, not in federal court.

Based on recent decisions of the Federal Circuit, the Texas state courts held that even a legal malpractice claim had to be brought in federal court and any appeal of that claim would go to the Federal Circuit, as long as the underlying malpractice theory for the claim involved patent law. For that reason, the Texas state courts refused to hear the legal malpractice claim, because it was based on patent law.

The case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and the Supreme Court reversed. It held that except under very unusual circumstances, it was unnecessary to bring a legal malpractice claim based on patent law in federal court. The case was decided on 2/20/13 and is styled Gunn v. Minton.

Basis For A Legal Malpractice Claim

The American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Lawyer’s Professional Liability recently came out with a study entitled “Profile of
Legal Malpractice Claims: 2008-2011.” The study confirms that, as in past years, the most common basis for a legal malpractice claim is failure to know and apply the law. This particular problem made up 13.6% of all legal malpractice claims during the period studied and this is consistent with past trends.Mr. Entrekin recently took on a case in another state where a partner at a large law firm was asked to draft a contract for a company and its owners. The lawyer produced and encouraged the client to sign a contract which seemed to be drafted by someone who was wholly unaware of the law governing the subject matter. The partner kept the contract in place and drafted supportive amendments to it for years. The contract was unenforceable, the business was wiped out as a result of this and the clients of the law firm sustained eight figures worth of damages. The law firm showed no concern, refused to release the file and joked openly about how their clients were now destitute.If you or a loved one are the victim of legal malpractice and have suffered very substantial monetary damages which would not have occurred without the malpractice, call The Entrekin Law Firm today at (602) 954-1123.

Legal Malpractice Arizona

Arizona attorneys are licensed professionals under Arizona law. Arizona Revised Statute 12-2602 states that if a person wishes to bring a claim against a licensed professional, they must certify in a separate document filed with the Complaint as to whether expert testimony is required to prove their claim.

If the Complaint alleges conduct so obviously actionable (i.e. stealing from a trust account) that any laymen could easily recognize it as such, expert testimony is generally not required. If, on the other hand, the conduct at issue is something that a laymen would require some help in understanding, expert testimony us generally required.

Once the Court determines or the parties agree that expert testimony is required, the person bringing the claim must produce a sworn affidavit from a licensed attorney, 40 days or sooner after the defendant attorney files their Answer.

The sworn affidavit must contain, at a minimum, the expert’s qualifications, the factual basis for each claim and a description of how the actionable conduct by the defendant attorney caused damages.

If multiple issues are alleged, there is no limit to the number of expert attorneys who may offer affidavits in a given case. If the Court determines that an expert affidavit is required and none is produced within the time limits, the Court may dismiss the case.
camelback

Do you feel you are the victim of legal malpractice?  Call The Entrekin Law Firm (602) 954-1123.

Legal Malpractice Attorneys

These are the times that try attorneys souls as they go into deep debt to obtain a law degree that looked promising but is not paying off.   Recent graduates are having a difficult time finding employment to start paying off their debts.  There are 199 ABA accredited law schools. Law schools are required to post a chart on their website showing their graduates’ employment outcomes.  A study was done to examine if the data posted was correct and accurate to the viewer.  Unfortunately, 46% of the data charts were misleading.  When law students are graduating they are facing a very difficult job market.  In 2011, the three white-collar professions that lost workers were finance, insurance and law.   When a firm does take on a new attorney, they all too often lack the resources to properly train and supervise them.   Mr. Entrekin has several legal malpractice claims he is currently working on where the attorney is less than 5 years graduated from law school and takes on a case that is very strong and winnable, but is destroyed and ultimately dismissed. When this happens, it is important for the client to call the Phoenix legal malpracticeAmerican Flag attorneys at The Entrekin Law Firm.  We will let you know if you have a valid claim to purse.

Attorney and Judge Unite in Fraud to Pocket Millions of Dollars

Kentucky attorney Eric C. Conn is being accused of taking millions of dollars for his legal services regarding disability claims that were wrongfully approved by his co conspirator accomplice Judge Daughtery.  The claim states that many of Conn’s clients who didn’t deserve lifetime disability were approved improperlyy by the administrative law judge.  These approvals cost the federal government tens of millions of dollars.

B.J. Vernia is one of the attorneys that filed the suit claims that Judge Daugherty manipulated the docketing system to gain assignment of Conn’s cases.  Daugherty approved over 99% of the claims brought before him, whereas the national average is about 62%.  Each disability case that Conn was granted for his clients enabled him to pocket payment.  In 2010 Conn was paid roughly $3.8 million by the Social Security Administration.   In 2010 Daughtery saw 1,284 disability cases and chose to approve all but four of them.  Vernia filed the complaint under the False Claims Act which enables the whistle blower to get a portion of the recovered money in cases where the federal government has been defrauded.

If you feel you are the victim of legal malpractice call The Entrekin Law Firmlaw in Phoenix, Arizona (602) 954-1123.

Legal Malpractice Involving a Fraudulent Capital Loan

L. Londell McMillan filed a suit in the Manhattan federal district court that Barclays Bank and the former law firm Dewey & LeBoeuf , without his permission, entered into a loan agreement in his name.  McMillan is claiming that the bank contacted him to pay back borrowed money he says he never borrowed.  The loan agreement was for $540,000.  In the suit McMillan says the purpose is to “challenge a fraudulent scheme orchestrated and arranged”.
If you feel you are the victim of legal malpractice in Arizona contact The Entrekin Law Firmlaw at (602) 954-1123.

How To Prove Legal Malpractice In Arizona

If you feel you are the victim of legal malpractice in Arizona there are some standard facts that must be proved in order to pursue a claim.  First, you must have documentation proving that there was an attorney-client relationship.  If there was not an attorney-client relationship there is no grounds for pursuing a legal malpractice claim.

Next, there must be proof of negligence on the attorneys behavior.  Some of the areas where this can easily be shown include:

  • Attorney takes money from his trust account that belongs to his client.
  • The attorney misses a deadline and the case is dismissed
  • The attorney fails to produce documentation readily available to support the claim.
  • Attorney fails to return phone calls and refuses to update the client on the case.

There are other legal malpractice claims that may be more difficult to prove.  If you feel you are the victim of legal malpractice in Arizona call The Entrekin Law Firmlaw and we will let you know if you have a valid claim to pursue (602) 954-1123.

How To Prove Legal Malpractice in Arizona

If you feel you are the victim of legal malpractice in Arizona there are some standard facts that must be proved in order to pursue a claim.  First, you must have documentation proving that there was an attorney-client relationship.  If there was not an attorney-client relationship there is no grounds for pursuing a legal malpractice claim.

Next, there must be proof of negligence on the attorneys behavior.  Some of the areas where this can easily be shown include:

  • Attorney takes money from his trust account that belongs to his client.
  • The attorney misses a deadline and the case is dismissed
  • The attorney fails to produce documentation readily available to support the claim.
  • Attorney fails to return phone calls and refuses to update the client on the case.

There are other legal malpractice claims that may be more difficult to prove.  If you feel you are the victim of legal malpractice in Arizona call The Entrekin Law Firmlaw and we will let you know if you have a valid claim to pursue (602) 954-1123.

Herbalife Lawsuit: Legal Malpractice Arizona Attorneys

One of the areas attorneys can be accused of legal malpractice is over billing. Recently the heir to Herbalife turned 18 and sued his attorneys at Rosenfeld Meyer & Susman for ‘exorbitant billing’. The Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Paul Gutman had Richard Neal handle the fee dispute. After 5 days of testimony and more than 150 exhibits Neal ruled that his attorney Mitchell Silberg could keep the $2.47 million but refused them the additional $1.3 million they were trying to get. Chodos, a sole practitioner was also allowed to keep the $632,000 he had been paid but isn’t due the additional $1.75 million he wants.

If you feel you are the victim of Arizona legal malpractice call The Entrekin Law Firmlegalmala (602) 954-1123.

Arizona Legal Malpractice

Herbalife founder Mark Hughes died in 2000 and left Alexander Hughes $400 million. The trustees of the estate are being accused of a complicated tax-saving plan that led to a $350 million lawsuit against the estate. Attorneys Mitchell Silberg and Hillel Chodos handled the business litigation. Mitchell Silberg had more than 40 attorneys working to unseat the trustees of the estate. They were unsuccessful and so he brought in Chodos who did not keep proper time records and charged $1,000 per hour.

The trustee attorneys at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld claim that Silberg and Chodos did not protect Alex’s interests. Akin Gump contends that Silberga and Chodos were helping Alex’s mother who won $14 million in her divorce settlement.

Suzan Hughes, guardian of Alex had her lawyer write that Silberg and Chodos:

“were repeatedly sanctioned by the court, were ineffective and were criticized by the court for substandard work,\”

When attorneys commit Arizona legal malpractice fraudit is important for the client to act quickly before the statues expire. If you feel you are the victim of legal malpractice call The Entrekin Law Firm (602) 954-1123.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.