6 A.3d 860
D.C.2010Background
- Ross's employment-discrimination claim against WASHINGTONIAN was dismissed with prejudice after the Martins failed to respond to a motion to dismiss.
- The Martins represented Ross in the underlying District Court case before it was dismissed.
- Ross sued the Martins for legal malpractice; a jury awarded Ross $230,000 in damages.
- Appellants challenge whether Ross would have prevailed in the underlying discrimination case but for the Martins' breach.
- Appellants contest the trial record: expert qualification of Michael Specter and a purported typo on the verdict sheet affecting Mrs. Martin's liability.
- Throughout trial, the Martins and Martin & James, LLP were treated as a single entity for liability purposes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ross would have prevailed but for the breach | Ross argues dismissal would have survived; breach proximately caused loss. | Martins contend Ross would not have succeeded, so no causation. | Sufficient evidence supported causation; Ross could have prevailed. |
| Whether Specter was qualified as an expert | Specter met expertise criteria to testify on standard of care. | Challenge to Specter's qualification as an expert. | Specter reasonably qualified as an expert given experience and practice. |
| Whether the verdict-sheet typo about Mrs. Martin was harmless error | Typo omitted Mrs. Martin’s name from one question and could mislead. | Treat Martins as a single entity; error was harmless. | Harmless error; Mrs. Martin properly included in liability. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rosenthal v. Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal, LLP, 985 A.2d 443 (D.C. 2009) (reaffirms that a factfinder may infer discrimination from evidence)
- Stoyanov v. Winter, 643 F.Supp.2d 4 (D.D.C. 2009) (prima facie discrimination evidence can be established by plaintiff testimony)
- Portis v. First Nat'l Bank of New Albany, 34 F.3d 325 (5th Cir. 1994) (discrimination case can go to jury on prima facie showing)
- Yarbrough v. Tower Oldsmobile, Inc., 789 F.2d 508 (7th Cir. 1986) (allowing prima facie discrimination proof despite employer challenges)
- Stella v. Mineta, 284 F.3d 135 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (supports prima facie discrimination framework in circuit disputes)
- Otis Elevator Co. v. Tuerr, 616 A.2d 1254 (D.C. 1992) (expert testimony standard and trial court discretion)
- Niosi v. Aiello, 69 A.2d 57 (D.C. 1949) (elements of a legal malpractice claim)