April 10, 2025

Lawyers have a multitude of obligations that they owe to their clients when providing them with legal representation. If you have suffered losses due to legal malpractice, the Helbraun Law Firm can help.

A lawyer must provide their client with legal advice in many areas. Not only must they explain the case itself and provide tactical advice, but the lawyer must also provide other information. If they fail to keep their client informed about both their own legal situation and the law, they could be liable in a malpractice lawsuit.

If you have been victimized by an attorney who was not adhering to their professional responsibilities and the obligations they owed you, speak to the San Francisco legal malpractice lawyers at The Helbraun Law Firm. Our team of attorneys can discuss your case in a free initial consultation.

A Lawyer Must Provide Certain Information to Their Client

San Francisco malpractice cases teach us that a lawyer’s failure to provide key information when needed could be considered legal malpractice. Attorneys have an obligation to use due care and act as a reasonable lawyer would under the circumstances. Legal malpractice does not just mean that an attorney has actively made a mistake. One could also potentially recover compensation when the lawyer has failed to do something. The attorney is expected to not only advise their clients of the law, but also of other practical considerations, such as their ability to file a claim against an insurance policy to cover the loss.

One example of a San Francisco legal malpractice case where a law firm was sued for failing to provide information was Jordache Enterprises v. Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison. Brobeck was a legal giant in the San Francisco area before it collapsed after the Dot Com bubble burst. In this case, the clothing retailer Jordache was sued for selling knockoffs of a competitor’s clothing. Jordache’s insurance broker told it that the claim would not be covered under the company’s access liability policy. Brobeck was representing Jordache in defending against the initial claim. Nobody even asked Brobeck about whether the claim could potentially be covered under the liability policy. Jordache missed a key deadline in the case to tender claims to the insurance company because it was not told that insurance may potentially cover the claim. In a case that made it all the way to the California Supreme Court, the judges held that the failure to investigate insurance coverage, or advise the client to report the case to the insurance company, is an actual injury that could lead to a malpractice claim.

Lawyers Must Also Provide Information About Changes in the Law

The failure to provide necessary information is also an issue in a recent case that was filed in San Francisco Superior Court. In this case, Texas Insurance Company filed a lawsuit against its law firm Hinshaw & Culbertson for $11 million because it was found jointly and severally liable in a jury verdict against its client. Joint and several liability means that all responsible parties could potentially be obligated to pay the entire verdict, even if they were only partially responsible for what happened. Under Proposition 51 (also known as the “Deeper Pockets Rule”), all defendants are jointly liable for the plaintiff’s economic damages, while they are severally liable for non-economic damages. Prop 51 was passed in 1986 with the purpose of preventing plaintiffs from suing defendants for no other reason than the fact that they had a deeper pocket.

The insurance company claims that it did not know about a recent California law that says joint and several liability applies to economic damages. As a result of not having this information, the insurance company was on the hook for the entirety of the verdict, even though its own policyholder was only 3% to blame for the accident. The insurance company claims that it would have settled the case for the $1 million policy limit had it known the law in California and had its lawyer advised them of it.

San Francisco legal malpractice cases also instruct that anyone who hires a lawyer can sue them for malpractice, even insurance companies. In fact, insurance companies are frequent malpractice plaintiffs. Insurance companies hire lawyers very often to defend against claims when their policyholder is sued because they have a duty to defend. They rely on their attorney to advise them of the law and the potential legal risks. Insurance companies do not hesitate to sue their defense attorney for malpractice when the case goes to court, and the insurance company is ordered to pay more money than they would have in a settlement agreement. Insurance companies are especially likely to sue their attorney because they can be sued themselves by their client for bad faith when they fail to settle a claim when they should have.

Contact a San Francisco Legal Malpractice Law Firm Today

Schedule a free initial consultation with the legal malpractice attorneys at The Helbraun Law Firm by calling us today at 415-982-4000. After learning more about your case, we can advise you about whether you have a potential legal malpractice case against your prior attorney.

David M. Helbraun

Attorney David M. Helbraun at the Helbruan Law Firm in San Francisco emphasize litigation and conflict resolution in the areas of legal malpractice, civil rights & police misconduct and insurance & tort litigation.