Legal Malpractice

In California, Notice to Admit Has Bite in a Legal Malpractice Case

By (Andrew Lavoott Bluestone)

In New York a Notice to Admit is a discovery device which is used, but which has a small part in the panaply of discovery weapons.  Failure to admit that which is later provded is subject to sanctions and costs, but nominal costs are the usual outcome.

Here, in a report from California Attorney's fees blog about a cost-shifting statute put into play in a legal malpractice case which cost $ 80,000.  Here are the details:

"The fee-shifting provision of Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.430(a). allows a trial court to award “costs of proof,” including reasonable attorney’s fees, to a party that proves facts that should have been admitted through the requests for admission (RFA) discovery process. This case is the second illustration of how practitioners need to be very careful in responding to requests for admission or else expose their clients to substantial “cost of proof” awards. West Side Health Care Dist. v. Hooper, Lundy & Bookman, Case No. B190562 (2d Dist., Div. 4 June 11, 2008) (unpublished), involved a plaintiff suing its Former Attorneys for transactional legal malpractice. The trial judge granted summary judgment based on the statute of limitations contained in Code of Civil Procedure section 340.6 and on lack of causation, rulings which were affirmed on appeal.

Winning Former Attorneys also moved for an award of $122,626.42 in attorney’s fees and costs (mainly fees) under the RFA fee-shifting statute, plus $3,240 of costs in bringing the fee motion. "

Full post as published by New York Attorney Malpractice Blog on June 13, 2008 (boomark / email).