Legal Malpractice Law Review : Professional Responsibility Case Summaries & Commentary : Bennett J. Wasserman : LegalMalpractice.com : Lawyer Malpractice & Legal Ethics

Lawson v. Nugent, 702 F. Supp. 91 (D.N.J. 1988)

NJ: Underlying criminal conviction matter

Student Contributor: Laura Binski

Facts: The client was indicted for robbery of a Post Office and hired the lawyer to represent him. The client claims that the lawyer encouraged him to plead guilty to all three counts of the indictment without investigating whether a factual basis existed for the guilty plea. The client was then sentenced to twenty-five years in a maximum-security penitentiary. While in prison, the client hired a new lawyer who successfully made motions to vacate the guilty plea to two aggravated counts of indictment. The client was released after serving five years of his sentence. The client then sued his original lawyer, claiming that but for the lawyer’s negligent representation, the client would have served a maximum of forty months in a correctional facility. The client seeks damages for the emotional distress he suffered during the “extra” twenty months of confinement.

Issue: May a client recover damages for emotional distress when his relationship to the lawyer was based on a liberty, rather than economic interest?

Ruling: Yes.

“A lawyer who commits malpractice is liable to his client for any reasonably foreseeable loss caused by his negligence including emotional distress resulting from the loss of liberty.”

Wagenman v. Adams, 829 F.2d 196, 222 (1st Cir. 1987). The Court reasons that deprivation of his freedom could potentially cause an individual to suffer mental distress. Therefore, the client can go forward with his claim of emotional distress due to the extra twenty months he spent in a maximum-security penitentiary allegedly due to negligent representation.

Lesson: The Court makes a point to distinguish between a loss of liberty and loss of economic interest. Typically, legal malpractice actions revolve around a loss of economic interest. Courts generally do not allow emotional distress claims when it is just loss of economic interest at stake in a legal malpractice case. Guatam v. DeLuca, 215 N.J. Super. 388, 521 A.2d 1343 (App. Div. 1987).

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Wagenmann v. Adams, 829 F.2d 196 (1st Cir. September 9, 1987).

Facts:  After what appeared to be a series of misunderstandings between Wagenmann and his family members, Wagenmann was searched and arrested without a warrant, brought to a holding cell, and ultimately, involuntarily admitted to a mental hospital.  His court-appointed attorney, Healy, entered a general appearance on Wagenmann's behalf in connection with the commitment proceedings, bail and criminal charges.  

Allegedly, Healy never inquired as to what had happened, but did say that he was a friend and fellow parishioner of one of the individuals who had been responsible for reporting Healy to the police.  When Wagenmann asked Healy to withdraw and get him another lawyer, Healy apparently refused.  Healy also refused Wagenmann's requests to be brought before a judge.  

Instead, Healy proposed that Wagenmann immediately leave town or agree to be committed to a mental hospital. Wagenmann refused and a psychiatrist present at the time saw no grounds upon which Wagenmann could be admitted.  Healy then commented "maybe in New York you're something, but [in Massachusetts], you're nothing," and left.  

Wagenmann was later informed that he had in fact been committed to a mental hospital for a twenty day observation period.  After some time, Wagenmann was visited by a psychiatrist who saw no basis to justify his admission and arranged for his immediate release.

Wagenmann subsequently sued Healy for legal malpractice, requesting damages for emotional distress.  Wagenmann was awarded damages against Healy and Healy appealed.

Issue:  Is a Plaintiff in a legal malpractice suit entitled to damages for emotional distress? 

Ruling:  Yes, if it is foreseeable from the attorney-client relationship that a breach of the applicable standard of care will cause the client to suffer a loss of liberty or social stigma.

The Court noted that "an attorney who commits malpractice is liable to client for any reasonably foreseeable loss caused by his negligence."  If it were otherwise, especially in situations where the attorney-client relationship was based on something other than the client's economic concerns, the attorney would effectively be immunized from liability even though he exposed his client to a "parade of horribles."

Here, Wagenmann was entitled to damages for emotional distress -- He had been involuntarily confined to a mental hospital as a result of his attorney's negligence and alleged misconduct.  This, in turn, caused Wagenmann continuing anguish and fear that others, including prospective employers, would learn of it and question his sanity.  Consequently, the Court concluded: 

That Healy was guilty of malpractice in the defense of commitment proceedings, rather than in the prosecution of a civil claim for damages, is no reason artificially to shield him from the condign consequences of his carelessness. 

Lesson:  Emotional damages are recoverable in legal malpractice action where the client's damages include something other than a purely economic loss, i.e. incarceration, false imprisonment, or significant injury to reputation. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Lawson v. Nugent, 702 F. Supp. 91, (N.J. 1988); 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14576

NJ Underlying criminal action.

Student Contributor: Coleen Gaedcke

Facts: The plaintiff retained the defendant as defense counsel after being indicted for robbery of a post office. Upon the advice of the defendant, the plaintiff pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 25 years in prison. While in prison the plaintiff retained new counsel and obtained a reduction in his sentence and was released after serving 5 years. The plaintiff then brought a legal malpractice case against the defendant where he alleged that but for the defendant’s negligent legal representation he would have served a maximum of 40 months in prison. The plaintiff sought damages for emotional distress as a result of the anguish he suffered for the extra 20 months he spent in prison as a result of the defendant’s representation.

Issue: Whether a criminal defendant can recover damages for emotional distress from his attorney in a legal malpractice action based on the attorney’s representation in a criminal proceeding?

Ruling: Yes. The District Court held that the plaintiff may present evidence of emotional distress damages in a legal malpractice action.
1) Generally, damages in a legal malpractice claim are limited to economic loss and damages for emotional distress are not recoverable in a legal malpractice action absent some egregious or extraordinary circumstances.
2) In New Jersey, the courts have increasingly allowed for emotional damages in an increasing number of cases and a plaintiff may prove such damages attributable to an extra 20 months of confinement in prison.

“an attorney who commits malpractice is liable to his client for any reasonably foreseeable loss caused by his negligence including emotional distress resulting from the loss of liberty.” 
 

Lesson: When representing a client in a civil case, the court is unlikely to award damages for emotional distress absent extraordinary circumstances because the nature of the attorney client relationship is primarily based on economic interest. However, the attorney client relationship in a criminal proceeding is predicated upon a defendant’s liberty interest.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Lawson v. Nugent, 702 F. Supp. 91 (D.N.J. 1988)

NJ Underlying Criminal Action

Student Contributor: Colleen Gaedcke

Facts: The plaintiff retained the defendant attorney as defense counsel after being indicted for the robbery of a post office. Upon the advice of the defendant attorney, plaintiff pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 25 years in prison. While in prison, the plaintiff retained new counsel and obtained a reduction in his sentence. Eventually, he was released after serving 5 years.
Upon release, plaintiff brought a legal malpractice suit against the defendant attorney alleging that, but for the defendant’s negligent legal representation, he would have served a maximum of only 40 months in prison. The plaintiff sought damages for emotional distress as a result of the anguish he suffered for the additional 20 months he spent in prison, allegedly, as a result of his attorney’s ineffective representation.

Issue: Can a criminal defendant recover damages for emotional distress in a legal malpractice action?

Ruling: Yes. The United States District Court, District of New Jersey, held that the plaintiff may pursue emotional distress damages if he could first establish (1) the existence of some egregious or extraordinary circumstance; and (2) the allegedly negligent attorney was retained to protect something other the plaintiff’s economic interests.

Lesson: Given that the attorney-client relationship in a criminal proceeding is predicated upon the protection of the client’s interest in his freedom and sovereignty, “an attorney who commits malpractice is liable to his client for any reasonably foreseeable loss caused by his negligence, including emotional distress resulting from [his] loss of liberty."

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link