A little known principal in Legal Malpractice is the issue of privity when client is represented by union paid attorneys. An example would be a union member who is represented by an attorney paid for by the union in a disciplinary matter. There is a long line of cases which hold that there is no privity here, and that the client may not sue the attorney when the union hires and pays for the attorney. Here is another example, abliet in a headline catching situation from the NYLJ. by Tom Perrotta.

“Captain of Ill-Fated Ferry Loses Bid to Regain Job

Michael J. Gansas, the captain of the Staten Island ferry that crashed in October 2003, killing 11 passengers, yesterday lost his bid to regain his job after a federal judge in Brooklyn dismissed his suit against New York City and his union, the Marine Beneficial Association. Mr. Gansas claimed the city had denied him his due process rights and that his union attorneys had breached the duty of fair representation by mistakenly waiving his right to arbitration because they believed Mr. Gansas had pleaded guilty to a crime (he has not). Writing in Gansas v. City of New York, 05-CV-5484, Eastern District Judge I. Leo Glasser ruled that Mr. Gansas’ due process claim was “hollow” because the city’s efforts to interview him immediately after the Andrew J. Barbieri crashed were warranted, “and the seriousness of his failure to participate in those interviews cannot be overstated.” The judge granted summary judgment to the union on Mr. Gansas’ second claim because it was filed after the six-month statute of limitations. The decision will be published Friday.”

Defendant attorney in this legal malpractice case worked for the insurance company [oh, yes, and for the defendant estate]. It took the case, estimed a verdict of $ 300,000 – $ 600,000 and suffered a verdict of $ 78 million, later reduced to about $ 16 million. Subrogation? Privity? May the insurer sue the attorney it presented to the client? In this case: No. Details of case.

This attorney went from bad to worse. He got a nice case of a defective chair with physical injury. He let the statute of limitations run. He was sued, and settled the legal malpractice case against him. Then he got cought forging a judge’s signature on a document which would have release a lien on his assets. Now he is indicted. Details.

Here is another legal malpractice case for Vinson & Elkins. This legal malpractice case arises from their handling of San Diego’s investigatation of “the city’s financial disclosure practices and its pension system, and to represent the city before the Securities and Exchange Commission, which was investigating the city.

Vinson & Elkins released its report in September 2004, and in 2005, its contract was terminated after the company had been paid $6.2 million for its work.”

On July 26, City Attorney Michael Aguirre, in his latest interim report, charged that the company “repeatedly, systematically and knowingly” disregarded the obligations stated in its contract with the city. Details.

Depositions have always been the first battlefield of litigation. They served as traininggrounds for new litigators, and wre the scene of many an argument over whether the attorney was “coaching” his witness, obtruding into the questioning, making good or frivolous objections, some of which were remedied by calls to chambers. More substantive issues such as the scope of inquiry under Carvalho came up there too. Now, the landscape has changed in a seismic shift. As of 10/1/06 everything is different. Objections on relevance no longer permissible, speaking objections no longer permissible, reasons for objections now must be given. It’s all changed! See the NYLJ article by Daniel Wise for details.

Legal Malpractice following medical malpractice. It’s the hardest litigation in existance. Not only do you have to win the legal malpractice case by showing deviations of the attorney “but for” which plaintiff would have won, you must win the underlying medical malpractice case, again! Nevermind that the first attorney lost it. Now there is a website listing clients who did not prevail in medical malpractice. The point? Doctors may want to avoid these patients. In the website, it is suggested that these clients sue their attorney. Details.