Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Ethics (3)
- Code of conduct (2)
- Damages (2)
- Evidence (2)
- Expert testimony (2)
-
- Malpractice (2)
- Texas (2)
- Witness (2)
- ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct (1)
- Abatement (1)
- Abuse of discretion (1)
- Additional evidence (1)
- Advocacy expert (1)
- Advocate (1)
- Anders brief (1)
- Anders v. California (1)
- Appeals (1)
- Appellate (1)
- Appellate court (1)
- Appellate courts (1)
- Appellate judges (1)
- Appellate rulings (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- Arbitration award (1)
- Attorney's fees (1)
- Batson/edmonson (1)
- Bifurcation (1)
- Breach of duty (1)
- Breach of fiduciary duty (1)
- Brief guidelines (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Legal Education
Standards Of Review In Texas, W. Wendell Hall, Ryan G. Anderson
Standards Of Review In Texas, W. Wendell Hall, Ryan G. Anderson
St. Mary's Law Journal
Abstract forthcoming
The History, Meaning, And Use Of The Words Justice And Judge, Jason Boatright
The History, Meaning, And Use Of The Words Justice And Judge, Jason Boatright
St. Mary's Law Journal
The words justice and judge have similar meanings because they have a common ancestry. They are derived from the same Latin term, jus, which is defined in dictionaries as “right” and “law.” However, those definitions of jus are so broad that they obscure the details of what the term meant when it formed the words that eventually became justice and judge. The etymology of jus reveals the kind of right and law it signified was related to the concepts of restriction and obligation. Vestiges of this sense of jus survived in the meaning of justice and judge. …
The Texas Standards For Appellate Conduct: An Annotated Guide And Commentary, Gina M. Benavides, Joshua J. Caldwell
The Texas Standards For Appellate Conduct: An Annotated Guide And Commentary, Gina M. Benavides, Joshua J. Caldwell
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
The legal profession is bound by ethical rules that govern and guide our conduct and actions as lawyers. One of the under-appreciated, but profoundly important set of guidelines is the Texas Standards for Appellate Conduct. These Standards serve as an excellent practice guide for appellate practitioners and appellate courts and as a model code of conduct for the Bar as a whole.
The goal of this Article is to dissect the Texas Standards for Appellate Conduct and provide useful commentaries for the readers to better appreciate and understand each element of the Standards. The commentaries provide direct case examples and …
Causation And "Legal Certainty" In Legal Malpractice Law, Vincent R. Johnson
Causation And "Legal Certainty" In Legal Malpractice Law, Vincent R. Johnson
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
A line of California cases holds that causation of damages in legal malpractice actions must be proven with “legal certainty.” This Article argues that judicial references to legal certainty are ambiguous and threaten to undermine the fairness of legal malpractice litigation as a means for resolving lawyer-client disputes. Courts should eschew the language of legal certainty and plainly state that damages are recoverable if a legal malpractice plaintiff proves, by a preponderance of the evidence, that those losses were factually and proximately caused by the defendant’s breach of duty.
"Dirty" Experts: Ethical Challenges Concerning, And A Comparative Perspective On, The Use Of Consulting Experts, David S. Caudill
"Dirty" Experts: Ethical Challenges Concerning, And A Comparative Perspective On, The Use Of Consulting Experts, David S. Caudill
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
U.S. attorneys often hire consulting experts who potentially never get named as testifying experts. The same practice is evident in Australia, where the colloquial distinction is between a “clean” and a “dirty” expert, the latter being in the role of a consultant who is considered a member of the client’s “legal team.” A “clean” expert named as a witness is then called “independent,” signaling that he or she is not an advocate. In contrast to the U.S. discourse concerning consulting and testifying experts, focused on discovery issues, the conversation in Australia betrays immediate ethical concerns that both (i) explain why …
The Paragraph 20 Paradox: An Evaluation Of The Enforcement Of Ethical Rules As Substantive Law, Donald E. Campbell
The Paragraph 20 Paradox: An Evaluation Of The Enforcement Of Ethical Rules As Substantive Law, Donald E. Campbell
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
This Article addresses an issue courts across the country continue to struggle with: When are ethics rules appropriately considered enforceable substantive obligations, and when should they only be enforceable through the disciplinary process? The question is complicated by the ethics rules themselves. Paragraph 20 of the Scope section of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct includes seemingly contradictory guidance; it states the Rules are not to be used to establish civil liability, but also that they can be “some evidence” of a violation of a lawyer’s standard of care. Most states have adopted this paradoxal Paragraph 20 language. Consequently, courts …
Better Briefs, Lydia Fearing
Better Briefs, Lydia Fearing
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
Abstract forthcoming