First Page
320
Date Created
1-1-2013
Publisher
St. Mary's University School of Law
Editor
Charles Ipock
Last Page
329
Abstract
Like malpractice actions in general, the standards of proof required for each element of a legal malpractice claim evolved as legal malpractice claims became increasingly common. State and federal courts consequently produced a diverse range of opinions as jurisdictions continually adjust to evolving standards. The courts often seek to balance these standards of proof against their own precedent and the need to serve their particular notions of equity and justice. Perhaps the most contentious of these evolving standards of proof is the current state of the causation element, which is a critical test that must be satisfied to prevail in a legal malpractice claim. This issue was taken up by the Georgia Supreme Court in Leibel v. Johnson.
Recommended Citation
F. P. Brown,
Evidentiary Standards in the Legal Malpractice Trial-Within-a-Trial.,
3
St. Mary's J. on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
320
(2013).
Available at:
https://commons.stmarytx.edu/lmej/vol3/iss1/11
Included in
Law and Society Commons, Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons
