Sheridan v. Rintala
The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it sustained, without leave to amend, a law firms demurrer to a second amended complaint for legal malpractice. The client, who replaced the law firm as her counsel several months before the trial of a lawsuit in which she suffered an adverse jury verdict, did not allege facts demonstrating any causal connection between the law firms alleged acts of malpractice and the adverse verdict.
Comments on Sheridan v. Rintala