For the second year in a row, a gubernatorial veto has quashed an effort by California's public defenders to restore their immunity from malpractice suits. Defenders had assumed they had such immunity until one public defender's office was found liable for malpractice. Responding, defenders had legislation introduced extending protections to them. But Gov. Pete Wilson vetoed the measure saying public defenders are comparable to private counsel and not immune from attorney malpractice.
September 29, 1999 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
SACRAMENTO — For the second year in a row, a gubernatorial veto has quashed an effort by the state’s 3,000 public defenders to restore their immunity from malpractice suits.
Defenders had assumed they shared such immunity with prosecutors and other government attorneys until a member of the Los Angeles public defender’s office was found liable for malpractice in Barner v. Leeds, 62 Cal.App.4th 1240 (1998).
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
