How can a law firm be held individually liable for malpractice or breach of fiduciary duty?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Forward Thinking Transp. LLC v. Dongell Lawrence Finney LLP, B269073 (Cal. App. 2017):
In sum, plaintiffs are barred from pursuing their claims against the law firm because those claims are based entirely on the conduct of the four attorneys in whose favor there exists a judgment on the merits. Plaintiffs also do not explain how the law firm could be held individually liable for malpractice or breach of fiduciary duty when its attorneys have been exonerated for the same alleged acts or omissions. Finally, plaintiffs have not shown in what manner they can amend their operative pleading and how that amendment will change the legal effect of their pleading. (See Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349.)
Page 12
The October 8, 2015 judgment is affirmed. Respondents shall recover their costs on appeal.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
