Attorneys appointed by the Delaware Family Court to represent indigent families in dependency and neglect cases have qualified immunity from malpractice lawsuits and cannot cite the lack of malpractice insurance as a reason to withdraw from representation, the Delaware Supreme Court has ruled. The court's decision barred an attorney who works as in-house counsel for a Delaware corporation from withdrawing from a neglect case because he did not possess malpractice insurance.
The en banc court issued the opinion to resolve a question of law certified by the Family Court on June 11 in Hanson v. Morton.
This content has been archived.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
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]
