Court Opinion

ID: 9629456
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 09:43:13.994303+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:44.081767
License: Public Domain

KELLY, Judge,
concurring statement:
I join in the able opinion of my learned colleague Judge Johnson. I write separately to note that while we find that the damages sought are not too speculative to permit recovery, I find nothing in the majority opinion which would preclude the defendants from arguing on remand, as to each case in question, that without importuning the client nonetheless would have switched attorneys thus limiting damages, or as to cases taken on contingency, that damage assessment would be too speculative given the peculiar facts of the particular case. I also note that despite this reversal, the trial court’s discretion remains broad as to the assessment of damages on remand.