The Washington Supreme Court recently ruled that in a case of attorney malpractice the prejudgment interest should have been calculated on the total amount of the settlement lost, not the amount the injured party would have recovered after paying an attorney fee.[1] In 1992, the client was badly injured in a car accident when a drunk Driver hit her head-on.
The attorney mishandled the case. He did not file the complaint until just two days before the statute of limitations expired, and then failed to file the required confirmation of joinder pleading, resulting in dismissal of the case. [2]
The attorney was able to convince a judge to allow the claim to proceed but then failed to show up for the first day of trial. He also did not notify the client, who lived out of state, of the trial date. The court dismissed the Shoemakes’ complaint for the second time.
The attorney did not tell the client that their case had been dismissed. Instead, several years he told them the delay was due to a backlog at the court d that the court was too busy to consider their claims. Finally the client called the court herself and learned of the attorney’s deceit. When she confronted him, he claimed he would try to get the case reinstated, but he did not.
The client hired a second attorney who sued the original attorney for malpractice. The client learned that the insurance company for the drunk driver had offered $100,000 years earlier. The original attorney had never communicated this settlement offer.
Eventually, more than ten years after being hit and seriously injured by a drunk driver, the client was granted an award against the original attorney, including prejudgment interest.
This case illustrated how important it is to not only consult with an attorney if you have been inured, by a competent and trustworthy attorney.
[1] Shoemake v. Ferrer, 81812-6, 02/04/10.
[2] Shoemake v. Ferrer, 143 Wn. App. 819, 821, 182 P.3d 992 (2008).