Kaushansky v. Stonecroft Attorneys, APC (2025)

Citation: Kaushansky v. Stonecroft Attorneys, APC (2025)
Parent Document: Kaushansky v. Stonecroft Attorneys, APC (2025)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2025-03-14
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10356658/kaushansky-v-stonecroft-attorneys-apc/ ↗

Full Text

1,728 chars

5
& Bagley LLP v. Superior Court (2006) 137 Cal.App.4th 579
(Hecht), a case about the discoverability of a nonparty’s financial
information to use in proving collectibility, the court quoted
Campbell (this time with italics), cited Garretson, and stated: “It
is well accepted that ‘one who establishes malpractice on the part
of his attorney in prosecuting . . . a lawsuit must also prove that
careful management of it would have resulted in recovery of a
favorable judgment and collection of same . . . .”’ (Id. at p. 584.)
And in Wise v. DLA Piper LLP (US) (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1180
the court, citing Campbell, DiPalma, Garretson, and Hecht,
stated: “The plaintiff in a malpractice action must establish that
the underlying judgment lost as the result of the attorney’s error
could have been collected.” (Id. at p. 1190.) 4
        All intermediate appellate court roads lead to Campbell.
(I’ll get to the Supreme Court in a bit.) So let’s take a closer look
at that case. As stated, the plaintiff in Campbell was injured
when an incinerator in the defendant’s store fell on her foot. The
attorney for the plaintiff mishandled the case, and the court
dismissed it under the five-year rule in the predecessor to Code of
Civil Procedure section 583.310. The trial court in Campbell
found the defendant in the underlying case was not liable to the
plaintiff because the defendant had made a reasonable inspection
of the store premises (i.e., no breach of the duty of care) and the
accident was not foreseeable (i.e., no causation). (Campbell,
supra, 184 Cal.App.2d at pp. 760-762, citing Palsgraf v. Long
Island R.R. Co. (1928) 248 N.Y. 339.) In other words, the
plaintiff in Campbell failed to prove by a preponderance of the

Other Sections in This Document (56)

Full Text