Legal Opinion

Dong Wan Kim v. O'Sullivan

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided June 19, 2006No. 56035-2-IPublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1 A client may not assign a claim of attorney malpractice to his adversary in the litigation out of which the alleged malpractice arose. Kommavongsa v. Haskell, 149 Wn.2d 288, 67 P.3d 1068 (2003). Appellant Kim has attempted to avoid this rule by agreeing to prosecute the claim in his own name for the benefit of his original adversary and subject to that adversary’s right to control the litigation. Because the rationale of Kommavongsa renders such an agreement invalid, and because appellant Kim has not offered proof of damages that would support his claim in any event, the trial court…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Tank v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Seven Gables Corp. v. MGM/UA Entertainment Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Besel v. Viking InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Besel v. Viking Ins. Co. of WisconsinWashington Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Kommavongsa v. HaskellWashington Supreme Court · 2003

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Davis v. ScottKentucky Supreme Court · 2010
  2. In re the Marriage of FairchildCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  3. Molina v. Faust Goetz Schenker & Blee, LLPDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2017
  4. Kim v. O'SULLIVANCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2006
  5. Kenco Enterprises Northwest, LLC v. WieseCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API