Facts

Sandra Cardet hired a law firm to represent her in a lawsuit to recover payment for her construction work for Parthenia Park Villas Homeowner's Association (Parthenia). The law firm recovered a $797,532 judgment against the bankrupt Parthenia, but did not appeal or take any action on the court's refusal to add Phoenix HOA, Parthenia's successor, to the case. Cardet sued the firm for malpractice.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended defendant did not reveal the judgment could not be collected and failed to pursue individual homeowners and the judgment debtor to collect.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants contended that plaintiff recorded a mechanic’s lien for $497,000 immediately prior to expiration of time to do so naming only Parthenia as the homeowner and filed a complaint in pro per immediately prior to expiration of the 90 day time period. By that time 35 percent of the homeowners had lost their condominiums through foreclosure. Plaintiff thereafter retained defendants to continue prosecuting the action.

Plaintiff testified that she instructed defendants that she did not want to sue the homeowners and only changed her mind after judgment was obtained against Parthenia which was after three years of litigation. Plaintiff had not apportioned her claim amongst the homeowners and her change orders were in lump sum without breaking out any particular unit.

Parthenia filed a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy, after which a default judgment was obtained against Parthenia. The amount of the judgment should have been offset by the amount claimed by subcontractors in the underlying action in the sum of $253,000 which were settled, together with other amounts received by plaintiff in settlement against her claim.

Plaintiff did not present any evidence at trial that the judgment could be collected against any of the homeowners. The trial court committed numerous prejudicial errors during trial, including, but not limited to commenting on the evidence in front of the jury, denying defendants' motion for summary judgment and refusing to give various jury instructions.

Defendants contended they provided competent representation despite plaintiff's alleged participation in illegal kickbacks and overcharging the insurance company.

Damages

The plaintiff sought $797,532, the uncollected judgment.

Result

The plaintiff was awarded $556,197 for professional negligence, reduced by ten percent comparative liability. Plaintiff was awarded all of her attorneys' fees and costs bringing the judgment to $797,400.

Other Information

An appeal is pending.