legal malpractice claim in Washington

2026Although not involving the tripartite relationship, one more case, Kommavongsa v. Haskell, 149 Wn.2d 288, 291 , 67 P.3d 1068 (2003), speaks to the public policy relevant to the assignment of a legal malpractice claim.

2025On appeal, the supreme court characterized the issue it was addressing as the “narrow question” of “[w]hether a legal malpractice claim is assignable to an adversary in the same litigation that gave rise to the alleged legal malpractice.” Id. at 291 .

2024The statute of limitations period for a legal malpractice claim in Washington State is three years, which “period begins to accrue when the plaintiff has a right to seek legal relief.” Cawdrey v. Hanson Baker Ludlow Drumheller, P.S., 129 Wn.

2021Cawdrey v. Hanson Baker Ludlow Drumheller, P.S., 129 Wn.

2026Although not involving the tripartite relationship, one more case, Kommavongsa v. Haskell, 149 Wn.2d 288, 291 , 67 P.3d 1068 (2003), speaks to the public policy relevant to the assignment of a legal malpractice claim.

2006This case between these parties was certified for direct review by Division III of our court to decide whether "a legal malpractice claim is assignable to an adversary in the same litigation that gave rise to the alleged legal malpractice." Id. [3] Id. [4] Id. at 292, 67 P.3d 1068 . [5] Id. at 291, 67 P.3d 1068 . [6] In October 1996, nine months remained to set aside the orders of default and eleven months remained to set aside the default judgments. [7] Id. at 292, 67 P.3d 1068 . [8] Id. [9] Id. at 292-93, 67 P.3d 1068 . [10] Id. at 293, 67 P.3d 1068 . [11] Id. [12] Id. at 294, 67 P.3d 1068 .

2017Halvorsen v. Ferguson, 46 Wn.

2004Halvorsen v. Ferguson, 46 Wash.App. 708, 711 , 735 P.2d 675 (1986).

2015For example, Stewart Title held that an "alignment of interests is insufficient to find a duty running from [the law firm] to [the title insurer]" for purposes of a legal malpractice claim.39 An insurer must satisfy Trask to sue its insured's attorney for legal malpractice, and there is 34 Restatement § 51 cmt. f. 35 Id 36 Id. cmt. g. 37id\ 38 Stewart Title. 178 Wn.2d at 570 . 39 Id. at 567 .

2015For example, Stewart Title held that an "alignment of interests is insufficient to find a duty running from [the law firm] to [the title insurer]" for purposes of a legal malpractice claim.39 An insurer must satisfy Trask to sue its insured's attorney for legal malpractice, and there is 34 Restatement § 51 cmt. f. 35 Id 36 Id. cmt. g. 37id\ 38 Stewart Title. 178 Wn.2d at 570 . 39 Id. at 567 .

2023If a legal malpractice claim makes it to trial, the “ ‘trier of fact will be asked to decide what a reasonable jury or fact finder [in the underlying trial or “trial within the trial”] would have done but for the attorney’s negligence.’ ” Ang v. Martin, 154 Wn.2d 477, 482 , 114 P.3d 637, 640 (2005) (alteration in original) (quoting Daugert v. Pappas, 104 Wn.2d 254, 258 , 704 P.2d 600 (1985)).

2020To prove a legal malpractice claim, one must show: “(1) The existence of an attorney-client relationship which gives rise to a duty of care on the part of the attorney to the client; (2) an act or omission by the attorney in breach of the duty of care; (3) damage to the client; and (4) proximate causation between the attorney’s breach of the duty and the damage incurred.” Schmidt v. Coogan, 181 Wn.2d 661, 665 , 335 P.3d 424 (2014) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Ang v. Martin, 154 Wn.2d 477, 482 , 114 P.3d 637 (2005)).

2015App. 490, 497 , 265 P.3d 156 (2011). ¶18 A legal malpractice claim requires: “(1) [t]he existence of an attorney-client relationship which gives rise to a duty of care on the part of the attorney to the client; (2) an act or omission by the attorney in breach of the duty of care; (3) damage to the client; and (4) proximate causation between the attorney’s breach of the duty and the damage incurred.” Parks, 173 Wn.

2015App. 490, 497 , 265 P.3d 156 (2011). 5 No. 45250-2-II A legal malpractice claim requires: 1) [ t]he existence of an attorney-client relationship which gives rise to a duty of care on the part of the attorney to the client; (2) an act or omission by the attorney in breach of the duty of care; (3) damage to the client; and (4) proximate causation between the attorney’ s breach of the duty and the damage incurred.” Parks, 173 Wn.

2015The Trask court noted: In Stangland v. Brock, 109 Wn.2d 675 , 747 P.2d 464 (1987), we acknowledged the right of an estate beneficiary to bring a cause of action against an attorney under the multifactor balancing test....

2015The Trask court noted: In Stangland v. Brock, 109 Wn.2d 675 , 747 P.2d 464 (1987), we acknowledged the right of an estate beneficiary to bring a cause of action against an attorney under the multifactor balancing test....

2003Coffey, 756 S.W.2d at 156 .

2003Coffey, 756 S.W.2d at 156 .

2024See Piris v. Kitching, 185 Wn.2d 856, 861 , 375 P.3d 627 (2016) (legal malpractice); Micro Enhancement Int’l, Inc. v. Coopers & Lybrand, LLP, 110 Wn.

2024App. 810, 816 , 120 P.3d 605 (2005).

2020To prove a legal malpractice claim, one must show: “(1) The existence of an attorney-client relationship which gives rise to a duty of care on the part of the attorney to the client; (2) an act or omission by the attorney in breach of the duty of care; (3) damage to the client; and (4) proximate causation between the attorney’s breach of the duty and the damage incurred.” Schmidt v. Coogan, 181 Wn.2d 661, 665 , 335 P.3d 424 (2014) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Ang v. Martin, 154 Wn.2d 477, 482 , 114 P.3d 637 (2005)).

2020To prove a legal malpractice claim, one must show: “(1) The existence of an attorney-client relationship which gives rise to a duty of care on the part of the attorney to the client; (2) an act or omission by the attorney in breach of the duty of care; (3) damage to the client; and (4) proximate causation between the attorney’s breach of the duty and the damage incurred.” Schmidt v. Coogan, 181 Wn.2d 661, 665 , 335 P.3d 424 (2014) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Ang v. Martin, 154 Wn.2d 477, 482 , 114 P.3d 637 (2005)).

2018"Under the attorney judgment rule, the question is whether an attorney's particular judgment decision is within the range of reasonable alternatives or whether the attorney was negligent during the decision-making process." Arden, 193 Wn.App. at 760 .

2016Dana, 173 Wn.

2015App. 823, 848-50 , 82 P.3d 1179 (2003). 21 Cawdrev v. Hanson Baker Ludlow Drumheller.

2015App. 507 , 94 P.3d 372 (2004) (an aggrieved party must first challenge an erroneous ruling before bringing a legal malpractice claim). 11 No. 72533-5-1/12 Joudeh relies on cases discussing the reasonableness of efforts to mitigate damages.

2015App. 163 , 810 P.2d 4 (1991). 23 jd at 168-169. 24 CP at 82-83. 25 CP at 92. 7 No. 72533-5-1/8 • The "but for" test is used to determine proximate cause in a legal malpractice claim: "'but for' the attorney's negligence, the client would have obtained a better result."26 • Joudeh "must show that his underlying action was lost or compromised by Mr. Cochran's alleged breach of duty" and that "he would have fared better in the absence of Mr. Cochran's alleged breach—that is, that he would have prevailed and obtained a better recovery."27 • "[T]he loss of [Joudeh's] claims against SFCU and Auto Tr

2015"In Washington, the statute of limitations period for a legal malpractice claim is three years."21 This period begins to run "when the plaintiff has a right to seek legal relief," meaning that the plaintiff "know[s] the facts that give rise to that cause of action."22 One element of legal malpractice is an attorney-client relationship.23 20 Barrett v. Freise. 119 Wn.