I need some advice please.

If a lawyer does not do what is best for his client and the case goes past the required dates if we report him to the bar does that mean we can not bring legal action against him?

I am not sure if "what is best for his client" is something you can prove, since, for example, every person who has lost a court case feels their attorney is to blame. However, the answer to your question is no, reporting him to the bar association for wrong doing does not mean you cannot sue him for the same.

Absolutely not. Reporting a lawyer to the bar association is an attempt to bring a disciplinary action for failing to follow the rules for being a lawyer. It means you have documentation ...showing the lawyer has failed to do his or her duty to you or has taken advantage of a client or has failed to perform timely. There is often a loss in situations like these and the disciplinary committee in most states has a fund that lawyers contribute to that will pay a limited amount toward restitution to fix something caused by a lawyer found guilty of failing to abide by the rules. You pay nothing. It is all handled by lawyers working for the disciplinary committee. It also seems to take forever.

What you do in a civil court to bring complaint against a lawyer is another situation entirely. You have to pay a lawyer to bring a complaint and prove the issues... it has to be a particular kind of lawyer who understands the issues of malpractice and malfeasance and how to prove them within the rules of the court... where he cannot bring the court or the legal system into disrepute. It is a difficult job and it can bring trebled damages if your lawyer is successful.

Reporting a lawyer to the bar association is NOT the same as an attorney being disciplined for failure to follow the rules for being a lawyer.

Reporting a lawyer to the bar association means that the bar association will investigate and DETERMINE IF ANY WRONGDOING has taken place. While it is possible the bar association may find the lawyer is guilty of some wrongdoing, the filing of a complaint does not necessarily "mean the lawyer has failed to do his or her duty to you or has taken advantage of a client or has failed to perform timely (sic)" (i.e. in a timely manner).

The above quote implies that the filing of the complaint IS the same as disciplinary action being levied against a lawyer.

It is not.

Filing a formal complaint means one thing: An investigation will be launched, the outcome of which offers to possibilities:

1. Guilty of wrong doing or
2. Not guilty of wrong doing.

But, to state that the mere making of a complaint means that disciplinary action WILL follow is simply untrue.

My problem is that my attorney did not file papeers with the court before the deadline now I do not have a case because the deadline is up.

Thanks for all of your responces,

So according to your papers and documentation, the cause of action that your lawyer was to file papers with the court was lost because your lawyer did not file on a timely basis? Thus you have a reason to both want to see your attorney disciplined so he doesn't do it to another person's case, and you have a reason to want to file a civil case against the lawyer. The WANT versus recoverable loss is where you have not given us enough detail to determine FOR YOU whether your case warrants moving forward with a civil case against your lawyer. The question is whether the cost of the civil case is more than your losses and whether you can prove that you gave your lawyer the information to proceed on a timely basis. The other option of course is to file a complaint with the state bar association's disciplinary commission... and hope that they can find enough proof to warrant awarding you some small recompense. They do have a limit on how much they can pay.
So you should probably check with a new lawyer to see if your case is worth taking to civil court... take all your documentation with you to see the lawyer the first time. If your original lawyer has malpractice insurance (not all do, and those who don't usually don't have any assets), your new lawyer can file for malpractice... ask him what you need to prove.
In any case, a complaint even without sufficient proof is still recorded for the next time this original lawyer does not perform... and sooner or later s/he will face a hearing to determine his failures.

I'm hoping your losses were minor and your irritation only temporary.

Has he/she given a reason for not filing the paperwork?

While I am not saying this is the case in your instance, it IS possible for an attorney to have incomplete files, paperwork, etc. based on the reticence of the client or his failure to provide, or comply along the steps of the process. My point is, because the deadline was missed isn't necessarily a given that the attorney is civilly liable and a lawsuit is in order.

You have said very little about the external circumstances surrounding this action, so it isn't accurate for you to be told that an attorney missing a deadline is definitively his fault. While it makes sense to assume that in all probability it is, to state so without knowing anything about the hundreds of other variables is not accurate. Attorney error is only one possibility. There are many others and to ignore them is misguided.

I do agree that many times the research required for a junior lawyer to come up to speed in a new situation would tend to put the lawyer at a disadvantage when it comes to a timely filing of court papers. While that might tend to mitigate his performance, it does not mean he is qualified to be a lawyer. Sometimes lawyers are sent back to classes so they can become more familiar with deadlines and the law in cases where he has failed to perform on a timely basis.

Sometimes a lawyer takes a case without time to perform the duties and when they finally get to the case, discover that it has passed the statutory limitations on recovery or adjudication. This too can be a cause of action. Perhaps the lawyer feels he warned the client that he couldn't do what needed to be done UNTIL.... and that might mitigate his lacking performance... but frankly, as a lawyer he should know deadlines as his first business and should send a client on to another attorney if he lacks time.

Sometimes too, the client brings a case that cannot be handled because the time has already passed. It is terrible when this occurs and the attorney could have been of assistance but the client didn't bring enough information to inform the lawyer of the critical timing. This happens.

The only way to determine if he is at fault is to see a malpractice lawyer with your documentation and an outline of the dates you interacted and what was done/said. It will cost you nothing if he decides to take the case because it has a significant recovery involved, but if it is a small recovery or an intangible recovery, you will get to pay for his services. Expensive lawyers - these malpractice attorneys.

Wow. A lawyer who has passed the bar exam and is licensed to practice law is "SENT" back to school? Really? By whom?

He misses a deadline and a JUDGE presumably can REQUIRE him to go BACK to law school? JUDGES have no authority to make judgments about or evaluate how much they think a lawyer knows or doesn't know "about deadlines". A judge may file sanctions against an attorney, but he has absolutely no authority to "send him back to school" to learn about deadlines. Ridiculous.

"I'm sorry, Mr. Esquire, you failed to file the documents in a timely manner. Therefore, I am sentencing you to retake "DEADLINES AND PUNCTUALITY 101" again. (snort).

"In other news today, high profile attorney Gloria Alred has been sent back to some school somewhere for attorney's who don't file paperwork on time".

Riiiiiiiiiiiighttttttttt.

Let me guess. I misinterpreted what "sometimes lawyers are sent back to classes so they can become more familiar with deadlines" means?

Do tell.

Do you make this up as you go along?

Laughably incorrect.

Mufasaak,

The advice given to you needs to be proceeded with with the utmost caution or you will be stepping on the toes of a giant awaiting to eat you. That's just my "Jack and the Beanstalk" analogy of the situation you are in. Please do not be a sacrificial lamb before the bar and try as I have.

Please read my post to understand what can happen:

Personal Injury Attorney & Due Diligence

Good Luck In Your Attempt To Slay The Giant!

You May Need More Than A Goose That Lays Golden Eggs To Be Successful!!!



CaseLogic801