Highlighted Case

Background

Client brought legal malpractice action against law firm, alleging that failure of law firm, as appellate counsel in underlying patent infringement action against client, to challenge, in client's initial appeal in underlying action, the award of punitive damages against client as being constitutionally excessive resulted in client waiving its right to raise that issue when, on remand from the appellate court, the trial court considerably reduced the award of com-pensatory damages. The Superior Court, Maurice A. Ross, J., granted summary judgment to law firm. Client appealed.

Holdings

The Court of Appeals, Washington, C.J., held that law firm made reasonable professional judgment not to raise a claim, in client's initial appeal in underlying action, that award of punitive damages against client, which was three times the award of compensatory damages, was constitutionally excessive.

Affirmed.

If you have any questions about the 2010 Legal Malpractice & Risk Management Conference, please feel free to browse this site for information, or fill out the form below and the Conference Planner will respond to your question.

Questions can also be answered by calling the Conference Planner directly at 312-704-3329.

	Highlighted Case Biomet Inc. v. Finnegan Henderson LLP Background Client brought legal malpractice action against law firm, alleging that failure of law firm, as appellate counsel in underlying patent infringement action against client, to challenge, in client's initial appeal in underlying action, the award of punitive damages against client as being constitutionally excessive resulted in client waiving its right to raise that issue when, on remand from the appellate court, the trial court considerably reduced the award of com-pensatory damages. The Superior Court, Maurice A. Ross, J., granted summary judgment to law firm. Client appealed. Holdings The Court of Appeals, Washington, C.J., held that law firm made reasonable professional judgment not to raise a claim, in client's initial appeal in underlying action, that award of punitive damages against client, which was three times the award of compensatory damages, was constitutionally excessive. Affirmed.	Contact Us If you have any questions about the 2010 Legal Malpractice & Risk Management Conference, please feel free to browse this site for information, or fill out the form below and the Conference Planner will respond to your question. Questions can also be answered by calling the Conference Planner directly at 312-704-3329. Contact Details First Name: Last Name: Organization: Street Address: City: State: Zip Code: Country: Email Address: Telephone: Question: * These fields are required to ensure that you will be contacted regarding your question.
		Copyright Â© 2002 - 2009 Legal Malpractice & Risk Management Conference. All rights reserved.