3 ms·

I thought lawyers are liable for bad advice?

by Chris2048 7y ago

austenallred 7y ago
If that were actually true they’d all go out of business.
- Scoundreller 7y ago
  They do/should have insurance for this kind of thing. And usually lawyers are personally liable, so there is no “going out of business” unless they go personally bankrupt. Dunno how true all of the above is in CA. Get your own lawyer’s advice :)
mc32 7y ago
Legal counsel is about risk mitigation: do we fire this person? The question isn’t whether it’s moral or ethical. It’s what the risk exposure? What are the likely outcomes? Do we have our bases covered? Fire them! (Or, we can’t, it overexposes us, create a new department, assign them and then dissolve the department some time later and declare them redundant).
- Chris2048 7y ago
  I'm not sure what you mean by this. When counsel tell you something is legal, and it isn't, there's little subjectivity.
  - fhbdukfrh 7y ago
    The law has a few concrete, definitive truths but a huge volume of interpreted and subjective (and contradictory) statutes as well. Otherwise we wouldn't need lawyers in the first place
    - vageli 7y ago
      Exactly this! If the outcome for every case could be known in advance algorithmically or something we wouldn't have lawyers. Since the law is written by people and interpreted by people, it remains blurry when you zoom in close enough to specific unsettled cases.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    > When counsel tell you something is legal, and it isn't, there's little subjectivity. Stating that a thing is or is not legal is making a claim about the opinion other humans in positions of authority (whose specific identity is unknown) will have on a similar question in the future. There is always subjectivity in it, since you are literally predicting someone else's subjective opinion. The objectivity of law is a conceit, not a reality.
    - mc32 7y ago
      But that’s not entirely a bad thing. It allows for things to change over time. It allows for example for states to crack down on vaccine exemptions and allows for taxation and regulation of interstate commerce, etc.
dragonwriter 7y ago
Lawyers are liable for professional malpractice; whether particular bad advice is malpractice and whether the other party chooses to pursue it even if it might be are issues which affects whether they are liable for bad advice.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

I thought lawyers are liable for bad advice?

austenallred 7y ago

If that were actually true they’d all go out of business.

Scoundreller 7y ago
They do/should have insurance for this kind of thing. And usually lawyers are personally liable, so there is no “going out of business” unless they go personally bankrupt. Dunno how true all of the above is in CA. Get your own lawyer’s advice :)

mc32 7y ago

Legal counsel is about risk mitigation: do we fire this person? The question isn’t whether it’s moral or ethical. It’s what the risk exposure? What are the likely outcomes? Do we have our bases covered? Fire them! (Or, we can’t, it overexposes us, create a new department, assign them and then dissolve the department some time later and declare them redundant).

Chris2048 7y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by this. When counsel tell you something is legal, and it isn't, there's little subjectivity.
- fhbdukfrh 7y ago
  The law has a few concrete, definitive truths but a huge volume of interpreted and subjective (and contradictory) statutes as well. Otherwise we wouldn't need lawyers in the first place
  - vageli 7y ago
    Exactly this! If the outcome for every case could be known in advance algorithmically or something we wouldn't have lawyers. Since the law is written by people and interpreted by people, it remains blurry when you zoom in close enough to specific unsettled cases.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > When counsel tell you something is legal, and it isn't, there's little subjectivity. Stating that a thing is or is not legal is making a claim about the opinion other humans in positions of authority (whose specific identity is unknown) will have on a similar question in the future. There is always subjectivity in it, since you are literally predicting someone else's subjective opinion. The objectivity of law is a conceit, not a reality.
  - mc32 7y ago
    But that’s not entirely a bad thing. It allows for things to change over time. It allows for example for states to crack down on vaccine exemptions and allows for taxation and regulation of interstate commerce, etc.

dragonwriter 7y ago

Lawyers are liable for professional malpractice; whether particular bad advice is malpractice and whether the other party chooses to pursue it even if it might be are issues which affects whether they are liable for bad advice.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]