First Page
374
Date Created
7-2018
Publisher
St. Mary's University School of Law
Editor
Martha Alejandra Salas
Last Page
405
Abstract
A line of California cases holds that causation of damages in legal malpractice actions must be proven with “legal certainty.” This Article argues that judicial references to legal certainty are ambiguous and threaten to undermine the fairness of legal malpractice litigation as a means for resolving lawyer-client disputes. Courts should eschew the language of legal certainty and plainly state that damages are recoverable if a legal malpractice plaintiff proves, by a preponderance of the evidence, that those losses were factually and proximately caused by the defendant’s breach of duty.
Recommended Citation
Vincent R. Johnson,
Causation and "Legal Certainty" in Legal Malpractice Law,
8
St. Mary's J. on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
374
(2018).
Available at:
https://commons.stmarytx.edu/lmej/vol8/iss2/4
Included in
Courts Commons, Evidence Commons, Legal Education Commons, Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons, Legal Profession Commons, Legal Remedies Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons
