Recently written about in Blog 702, the differences and similarities between Legal Malpractice and Medical Malpractice were discussed.. “Frank focuses on the differences beween medical malpractice litigation, where Frank says doctors often get held liable for making reasonable treatment decisions, and legal malpractice cases, where he says the lawyers get more slack.”

Ted Frank points out: “Yet, even with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, one almost never sees legal malpractice claims in a lost or settled case: no client protests that a deponent could have been prepared better; that a cross-examination should have been more (or less) aggressive; that the attorney’s brief-writing failed to present arguments as clearly as it could have; that an opening or closing argument was too dry for the jury; that a settlement failed to extract the maximum possible value; that the law firm’s failure to have a client’s discovery ready when it filed a suit in a rocket docket alienated a judge that then made adverse rulings.”

We know this is an exageration, as many legal malpractice cases are filed on these exact grounds: failure to cross-examine a witness, failure to call a witness based upon discovery failures, failure to offer and have certain mammograph films at a medical malpractice trial.

Nevertheless, an interesting topic.