Does a lawyer have to obtain the consent of a client to settle a claim?

In reaching this conclusion the court examined the extent of the actions a lawyer may take on behalf of a client during the pendency of litigation, noting acts "incidental to the management of a lawsuit, such as making or opposing motions, seeking continuances, or conducting discovery" do not require a client's explicit approval. (Levy v. Superior Court, supra, 10 Cal.4th at p. 583, 41 Cal.Rptr.2d 878, 896 P.2d 171.) But settling a case is not incidental and thus "requires the client's knowledge and express consent. [Citation.]" (Ibid. ) The court pointed to the well-established rule " "that an attorney must be specifically authorized to settle and compromise a claim, that merely on the basis of ... employment [the lawyer] has no implied or ostensible authority to bind [the] client to a compromise settlement of pending litigation...." [Citation.]" (Ibid. )