Legal Industry News
December 29, 2009
Legal Engagement Contract Turned Lawyers into “Puppets” and Prevented Malpractice Action
Non-practicing San Francisco lawyer Curtis Kekoa Jr. wanted to maintain final control over everything his divorce lawyer, Robert Sprague did for him during his divorce proceeding. So Kekoa insisted on including a “control provision” in the contract by which he retained Sprague.
Seven months into Sprague’s representation of Kekoa, the two men parted ways and ultimately Sprague sued Kekoa for unpaid legal fees. Kekoa tried to counter-sue for malpractice or breach of fiduciary duty, but the San Francisco Superior Court held that Kekoa could not file such a countersuit. The Court determined that the “control provision” of Kekoa’s contract implied that…
To continue reading this article, subscribe now
It's FREE and only takes seconds
Image Credit: ©iStockphoto.com/stuartbur