The Area of Legal Malpractice among Health Care Practitioner

Few law firms or individual attorneys have been such repeat defendants. Third, not untilreal justification for an extended analysis of alternatives to litigation until the recent increase in legal malpractice claims. Fourth, it was not until recently that the bases for legal malpractice were settled. Before then, juridical occlusion of the applicable law took precedence over the festering of alternative procedures. Fifth, there was a lack of familiarity with arbitrament procedures, however among frequent participants in the malpractice ara.

In recent years, however, there has arisen a new impetus for resolving attorney-client disputes through arbitration. The first suit of dispute in which arbitration has been pushed is that of fees. Initially, local bar associations were the main proponents of arbitration of fee disputes; however, the American Bar Association took up the call after completing several studies on the subject. In 1995, the ABA enacted the Model Rules for Fee Arbitration, which were intended to provide a poseur for the states in encouraging attorneys to submit to the arbitration process in resolving fee disputes.

These recent developments show that the advantages of dispute resolution are becoming apparent to attorneys and bar associations. There are five basic advantages to arbitration. First, the time needed for dispute

resolution is generally shorter than with litigation in the courts. This can be a distinct advantage with respect to malpractice claims because such claims affect the insurability of an attorney, as well as the agiotage rates for insurance. In addition, the shorter time period results in decline costs, again affecting insurance.

Second, arbitration frequently creates an atmosphere genial towards negotiation and settlement. In contrast, litigation in court promotes the adversarial mood, with litigants winning a "win at any cost" attitude. Third, the arbitration of legal malpractice claims minimizes unfavorable publicity. This can be especially key for the attorney who is the object of such a claim. Fourth, the limited husking on tap(predicate) in arbitration tends to benefit the attorney who has cognition of the details and facts of the transaction. Fifth, since punitive damages are not available in arbitration an attorney will benefit from a mandatory arbitration clause.

Van Slyck, Willard N. Digests of Ethics Opinions. Arizona Attorney, June 1994, at 41.

Rau, Alan S. Resolving Disputes Over Attorneys' Fees: The Role of ADR. 46 Southern Wesleyan University Law Review 2005 (1993).

Michigan State Bar military commission on Professional and Judicial Ethics, Opinion R1-2 (1/28/89).

Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!