Boston Injury Lawyer Blog

The Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers, sitting in Boston, issued the following ruling regarding a licensed Massachusetts attorney on May 3, 2010. The ruling involved an attorney not responding to a client and failing to pursue a client's claim with diligence. The Boston attorney's at the Law Office of Neil Burns field repeated inquiries regarding potential attorney malpractice and attorney's responsibility to their clients. This case of discipline is an example of the requirements Boston and all Massachusetts attorneys must follow with respect to their clients.

In this case, the attorney met with a client regarding her collections matter in December of 2008. At that time, he placed a call to the debtor corporation and sent a demand letter on behalf of the client. At the end of this meeting, the attorney prepared a contingency fee agreement for the client and agreed to file a complaint on her behalf and pursue all legal action required to collect the debt. Within the month, the client signed and returned the fee agreement by mail. Unfortunately, the attorney took no further action of substance on behalf of the client.

Continue reading "Getting in Touch with Your Massachusetts Attorney " »

Two Boston area attorneys were temporarily suspended when, according to the Lawrence, Massachusetts court, they "put their self interest ahead of that of the client." Ferreira, Pedro (Lawyers Weekly No. 25-010-10) (April 8, 2010). This was a worker's compensation case involving the Department of Industrial Accidents, and Boston legal malpractice attorney Neil Burns has represented hundreds of clients in cases where an attorney did not put the client's best interest first.

In the Ferreira case, "On August 3, 2004, the employee suffered a back injury at work. The insurer accepted the case and began payment of temporary total incapacity benefits under §34" of the Worker's Compensation Act. "Sometime thereafter, the employee claimed a psychiatric injury as a sequela to the back injury. The insurer was prepared to accept the psychiatric injury until a dispute arose regarding the amount of any attorney's fee which might be due." The two parties were unable to resolve the attorney's fee issue. A hearing was scheduled in the Boston suburb of Lawrence, but the employee's attorney did not attend the hearing.

Continue reading "Boston Area Attorneys Suspended for Failing to Fully Represent Client " »

Legal malpractice is when an attorney breaches his or her duty to the client causing damages. Overbilling, on the other hand, is often considered the cousin of legal malpractice. In a recent notorious case, Judge Stephen Steinberg of the Probate and Family Court, issued a 33 page detailed decision criticizing Massachusetts attorneys Gerald Nissenbaum and James Vera for billing an estate almost $500,000.

The judge considered the attorneys "egregious behavior" and considered the fees "outrageous" Furthermore, when the grieving widow sought new counsel to seek a reduction in fees, Attorneys Nissenbaum and Vera resorted to "bullying tactics aimed at dissuading [the] wife from retaining counsel. I've never seen anything like this," said new counsel for the wife, former Superior Court Judge Owen Todd.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Attorney Nissenbum Ordered to Return $328,771 in Attorney Fees" »

In a case handed down by the US District Court, legal malpractice actions were clarified. The Court reaffirmed that there must be an attorney client relationship: an "implied" attorney client relationship is not valid, nor is there any "duty" owed to a non client. One of the fundamental aspects to any legal malpractice claim is that the lawyer owed a duty to the client. In the United States District Court decision, the Court held that because the defendant lawyers never owed any "duty" to the plaintiff, they could not be responsible for committing legal malpractice.

The "duty" owed is to provide legal advice and skills according to accepted professional standards. (Malpractice means that the lawyer has breached his or her duty, causing harm to the client.) When a fee agreement between the client and lawyer is signed by both sides, a "duty" clearly arises. When an attorney enters an appearance in court for a client, a "duty" arises. When an attorney and client meet, discuss the client's issue, advice is given, a "duty" is clearly owed to the client.

Continue reading "Legal Malpractice in Massachusetts Requires Duty Owed" »

The Massachusetts Clients' Security Board (CSB) is a panel of attorneys, appointed by the Supreme Judicial Court. They are entrusted with a never ending source of money - a portion of all registered Massachusetts attorneys' annual fees! Unfortunately, the CSB's job is never ending as well - to "manage and distribute the monies in the Fund to members of the public who have sustained a financial loss caused by the dishonest conduct of a member of the bar acting as an attorney or a fiduciary."

In the CSB annual report, filed on August 31, 2009, the total amount awarded was $1,328,039, a decrease of 50% from their 2008 fiscal year. On the other hand, the total number of claims decided, 116, was up 30% from last year. The largest single award was $243,498.00; the smallest, $365.00.

Continue reading "Victims of Massachusetts' Attorneys -- Awards 2009" »

Our office undertakes litigation with a personal injury and legal malpractice focus. While not many lawyers in Massachusetts will represent the victims of legal malpractice, our firm's mission is to uphold the trustworthiness of the profession. When the facts are clear, the Courts of Massachusetts will uphold the law and find legal malpractice, treble damages and award attorney fees.

We received a unique result in the below described case we tried before Judge Johnson, Chief Judge of the Boston Municipal Court, sitting as a Superior Court Justice.

Continue reading "Treble Damages in Massachusetts Legal Malpractice 93A Case, plus Attorney Fees" »