Parameters for bringing legal malpractice claims in the commonwealth could be due for a revision now that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said this week it will consider overturning a legal doctrine that bars clients from suing their lawyers after an unsatisfactory settlement outcome.

Since the 1991 Supreme Court decision in Muhammad v. Strassburger, Pennsylvania’s so-called Muhammad doctrine has generally prohibited disgruntled clients from bringing nonfraud malpractice claims against their counsel following a settlement to which the client agreed. The doctrine has earned a reputation as a lawyer’s protection against a former client’s “buyer’s remorse,” as it discourages frivolous lawsuits intended to relitigate settled cases.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]