California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Syers Props. Iii, Inc. v. Rankin, A136018 (Cal. App. 2014):
"To prevail in a legal malpractice action, '[s]imply showing the attorney erred is not enough.' [Citation.] The plaintiff must also establish that but for the alleged malpractice trial or settlement of the underlying lawsuit would have resulted in a better outcome. (Viner v. Sweet [(2003)] 30 Cal.4th 1232, 1244; [citations].) 'Thus, a plaintiff who alleges an inadequate settlement in the underlying action must prove that, if not for the malpractice, she would certainly have received more money in settlement or at trial.' [Citation.]" [] "The requirement that a plaintiff need prove damages to 'a legal certainty' is difficult to meet in any case. It is particularly so in 'settle and sue'
Page 13
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.