Court rules on malpractice cases
OLYMPIA – The state Supreme Court ruled Thursday that when clients sue their criminal defense lawyers for malpractice, they must prove they were actually innocent of the underlying charges against them.
But in a sharply divided 5-4 decision, the minority argued that the high court was creating a special protection for criminal defense lawyers. “This court should protect the public from lawyers’ misdeeds, not the other way around,” wrote Justice Tom Chambers.
The case stems from the 1996 indictment of psychiatrist Jessy Ang and his wife Editha, who were accused of taking part in a conspiracy that allegedly defrauded state and federal agencies. Ang was accused of providing about 200 patients with false diagnoses of mental illnesses to qualify them for welfare and Social Security benefits. The Angs, of Tacoma, jointly owned Evergreen Medical Panel, Inc., a company that provided the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries with independent medical examinations of injured workers.
The Angs hired Richard Hansen and Michael G. Martin as their lawyers. After a series of plea negotiations, the lawyers eventually encouraged the Angs to accept a plea midway through their trial. The Angs initially agreed to plead guilty to two of the 18 counts, but after consulting with a third lawyer, fired Hansen and Martin, and withdrew their plea agreement.
The Angs were ultimately acquitted on all 18 counts.
They sued Hansen and Martin in Pierce County Superior Court in May 2000, claiming malpractice. The trial court instructed the jury that the Angs had to prove they were innocent of the underlying criminal charges. On Jan. 11, 2002, the jury found that they had not done so.
The Angs appealed, claiming that the trial court was wrong to require them to prove their actual innocence of the underlying criminal charges, and that the court did not properly instruct the jury on the definitions of those charges. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling, and on Thursday, the Supreme Court majority agreed with the appellate court.
The majority opinion, by Justice Susan Owens, said the Angs’ acquittal only proved legal innocence, not “actual” innocence.
“Unless criminal malpractice plaintiffs can prove by a preponderance of the evidence their actual innocence of the charges, their own bad acts, not the alleged negligence of defense counsel, should be regarded as the cause in fact of their harm,” Owens wrote for the court.
In conclusion, the court wrote: “We find no persuasive reasons for this court to follow the minority position and shift the burden to the defendant attorneys to prove that their former clients were actually guilty of the charged crimes.”
But Justice Richard B. Sanders argued in his dissent that the malpractice standard for criminal cases should be the same as civil.
“There is no reason to invite malpractice in criminal cases by heightening the plaintiff’s burden to prove postconviction relief and actual innocence,” he wrote. “In every situation a client should rightfully expect competent legal representation.
Jessy Ang, who said he lost $325,000 in lawyer fees to Martin and Hansen, said he planned to file a motion for reconsideration.
“It’s a great shock,” he said Thursday, when reached at his Tacoma practice. “It sets a precedent that if they don’t protect their clients they’re not held accountable.”
“We’re pleased. We think it’s the right result,” said Christopher Howard, Martin’s lawyer. “If you allow people to second-guess the results on a plea bargain because they could do better later on, you can always have people saying I can do better, I want to sue my lawyer. You would be opening up a floodgate to litigation for plea bargaining results.”
A message left with Hansen was not immediately returned Thursday.