1. my attorney told me any evidence requires to be presented before trial so the other party can be reacted. However, he showed me a evidence the respondent presented at the date of trial implying that I have to sign the agreement, this is not right.
It's difficult to assess the situation here. Maybe the evidence your opponent presented would not have been discovered earlier and is material to the outcome of the action.
2. he always suggested that we go for trial, and that makes me feel confident that the trial result must be better than the result of settlement. However, at the date of trial, he made a last minute settlement, and that settlement was extremely not what I wanted. If I was ever given a hint of such a result or even a close one, I would have signed off for good long time ago, and wouldn't have to waited for this last minute settlement after paying huge of legal services to that attorney.
The threshold question is has he promised you anything or intentionally misled you to believe the way you did. Remember, what matters in the court are facts, not what you thought. If you have no fact to back your argument, I don't think the court would put much weight on it.
I am pretty sure that you will have to prove gross negligence, not simple negligence, in order to prevail in a malpractice cause. It is a very high standard, which I don't think you will pass with all the facts your presented here.
It's difficult to assess the situation here. Maybe the evidence your opponent presented would not have been discovered earlier and is material to the outcome of the action.
2. he always suggested that we go for trial, and that makes me feel confident that the trial result must be better than the result of settlement. However, at the date of trial, he made a last minute settlement, and that settlement was extremely not what I wanted. If I was ever given a hint of such a result or even a close one, I would have signed off for good long time ago, and wouldn't have to waited for this last minute settlement after paying huge of legal services to that attorney.
The threshold question is has he promised you anything or intentionally misled you to believe the way you did. Remember, what matters in the court are facts, not what you thought. If you have no fact to back your argument, I don't think the court would put much weight on it.
I am pretty sure that you will have to prove gross negligence, not simple negligence, in order to prevail in a malpractice cause. It is a very high standard, which I don't think you will pass with all the facts your presented here.
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”
