Legal Question in Construction Law in California

Question: This is about a general contractor tried to collect the remaining balance (mostly change orders and upgrade) from the homeowner for building a new home. Contractor met with the homeowner at an escrow company to get pay. Homeowner told contractor to endorsed the check back to him (for a reason) and he will pay off the remaining balance once the check is cleared. However, never happened. Contractor does not have the endorsed check information.

The contractor sued for remaining balance and fraud.

Is it alright for the lawyer not to deposition the key responsible party to make and defend the case? Since there was no written agreement for change orders and lack of information on the fraud charge. The only way to present the truth is to get the information out from the homeowner. However, none of the above issues were addressed and presented in the depositions of other key witnesses (architect, and contractor himself). The lawyer chose not to deposition the homeowner for the reason of saving money for his client. Is it ethical to take the case and not defending it? The total billing from lawyer was $80,000+ and lost the case. Is it malpractice not deposition the homeowner in the case?


Asked on 1/22/12, 9:06 pm

1 Answer from Attorneys

Deciding who to depose and who not to depose is not a question of ethics. It is a question of litigation strategy. It might quite possibly be malpractice not to depose the homeowner, but that could not be evaluated without knowing all about the case.

Read more
Answered on 1/23/12, 10:35 am


Related Questions & Answers

More Construction Law questions and answers in California