Fiduciary Duty, Tort and Contract: A Primer on the Legal Malpractice Puzzle

36 Pages Posted: 27 Jan 2016 Last revised: 28 Apr 2018

See all articles by Roy Anderson

Roy Anderson

Southern Methodist University - Dedman School of Law

Walter W. Steele

Southern Methodist University - Dedman School of Law

Date Written: 1994

Abstract

How to deal with problematic lawyer behavior has become a vogue subject. The ever increasing number of lawsuits against lawyers over the past decade has resulted in increased thinking about the law of attorney malpractice and has resulted in dramatic changes and developments in the practice of law and in attitudes about law practice. In deciding whether or not to grant the particular cause of action and in deciding the available remedy, the courts must make policy decisions. Should the remedy available to the client be measured against the amount of harm caused by the attorney's misbehavior? Should legal presumptions, rebuttable or irrebuttable, be applied so as to afford greater protection to clients from attorneys than they would have from other vendors of goods and services in the market place? Against what standard should the attorney's conduct be measured: reasonableness, uberrima fides, or some other? Should the standard vary depending upon the nature of the cause of action? These and other issues comprise our agenda.

Suggested Citation

Anderson, Roy and Steele, Walter W., Fiduciary Duty, Tort and Contract: A Primer on the Legal Malpractice Puzzle (1994). SMU Law Review, Vol. 47, No. 2, 1994. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2722831

Roy Anderson (Contact Author)

Southern Methodist University - Dedman School of Law ( email )

P.O. Box 750116
Dallas, TX 75275
United States

Walter W. Steele

Southern Methodist University - Dedman School of Law

P.O. Box 750116
Dallas, TX 75275
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
132
Abstract Views
668
rank
218,486
PlumX Metrics