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.