 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Koslen v. Chattman9/6/2001
s incumbent on counsel not to incur that risk unless absolutely necessary.
Even if counsel had waited, though, there was no guarantee that the court would have granted the motion to reopen discovery. Based on counsel's pretrial discussions with the court in the malpractice action, the jury here could have concluded that the court would have denied the request for additional discovery. There was also evidence from which the jury could have concluded that the client would have lost had she proceeded to trial on the evidence collected by prior counsel. Based upon these findings, the jury could have found the decision to dismiss before a court ruling on the motion to reopen discovery was not a proximate cause of appellant's loss; she would have lost at trial even if her new counsel had not dismisse d her case before the court ruled. For this reason, the jury verdict was not contrary to law or against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Therefore, I agree that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying appellant's motion for a new trial.
|