If you believe your lawyer negligently or recklessly represented you in a legal proceeding that resulted in an unfair or unjust outcome, you may have a valid claim of legal malpractice. An East Meadow Legal Malpractice Attorney can help you determine whether you have a case, and help you recover for your losses.
All lawyers are required to act diligently, ethically, and with vigor in their representation of clients. Unfortunately, various and often unforeseen circumstances can cause an attorney's representation to be less than adequate, which can result in actual harm and damages to a client. This is known as committing legal malpractice.
Common types of legal malpractice include missing court filings, failing to communicate, allowing conflicts of interest to persist, failure to know the law or perform research, misuse of client trust accounts, and client abandonment.
No matter what your legal issue may be, it is always best to seek legal help early in the process. An attorney can help secure what is likely to be the best possible outcome for your situation and avoid both unnecessary complications or errors.
An experienced lawyer should be able to communicate a basic "road map" on how to proceed. The lawyer should be able to walk you through the anticipated process, key considerations, and potential pitfalls to avoid. Once you've laid out the facts of your situation to the lawyer, he/she should be able to frame expectations and likely scenarios to help you understand your legal issue.
For most consumer legal issues, the size of the practice is much less important than the experience, competence, and reputation of the attorney(s) handling your case. Among the most important factors when choosing an attorney are your comfort level with the attorney or practice and the attorney's track record in bringing about quick, successful resolutions to cases similar to yours.
Personal jurisdiction - Requirement that a particular court have authority over a person, in order to bind that person to the judgment of the court, based on minimum contacts. International Shoe Co v. Washington is a landmark Supreme Court case outlining the scope of a state court's reach in personal jurisdiction.