I'm looking for someone to root for here.
Lawyer A represents Lawyer B in an action against Lawyer B's employer. Lawyer A withdraws at the beginning of trial, and the case is dismissed.
Lawyer A then sues Lawyer B for alleged unpaid fees and costs. Lawyer A's complaint seeks $44,000, but on the fourth day of a five-day trial, seeks to up that amount ("conform to proof") by several hundred thousand dollars, relying on a provision that he knew about for years. The trial court allows the amendment, and the jury gives him a six-figure award, but the Court of Appeal reverses.
Lawyer B, by the way, represented herself at trial. He's a transactional lawyer. She's also been declared a vexatious litigant.
How Lawyer B -- Ernestine Forrest -- gets to keep a spotless public disciplinary record despite having been declared a vexatious litigant I'll never know.
I'm not in favor of Lawyer B. But I'm definitely not in favor of Lawyer A either.
If only we could just give the six-figure back pay award that Lawyer A received to the deserving poor rather than ration it out between these two . . . .
