Legal Question in Civil Litigation in California

Re: Legal malpractice; excessive fees

Sorry, but I don't see any basis for a malpractice claim. There might be merit to your case, but if there is it is not apparent from anything you have said.

I think you have misunderstood the doctrine of respondeat superior. Assuming that the doctrine applies at all, all it means is that the employer would have to pay for the harm you caused while acting within the course and scope of your employment. It does not mean that you were entitled to be dismissed from the case. Had the plaintiff won at trial, he would have been entitled to take the money either from you or from the employer. Had he chosen to take it from you, you would then have had to get it from the company. After all, had it turned out that your company went bankrupt or otherwise couldn't afford the judgment but that you could, it would have been unjust to let you keep the money while the plaintiff recovers nothing.

Since you were not entitled to a dismissal, it could not have been malpractice for your attorney to fail to get one for you. You don't say what the basis was for your proposed cross-complaint, but if it was for bringing a meritless lawsuit then your attorney was right that you would not be able to sue until you had won the initial case. Further, because the basis on which you believed you were entitled to win was not correct, there is no reason to think you could have won such a claim even if you prevailed in the original lawsuit. I therefore see no reason to think you would have won your proposed suit against the plaintiff.

I understand your desire to pay nothing in settlement, but it is not surprising that the other side kept litigating against you when you refused to pay anything and that your legal fees went up as a result. Did you expect the other side to just give up and let you go? That's not how such things work. The plaintiff's decision to keep fighting certainly isn't malpractice on your attorney's part.

The terms of the settlement that you describe are perfectly normal, and I see no hint of malpractice from the fact that you accepted them. Besides, you were free to continue fighting if you wanted to. It is not your lawyer's fault that you finally came to your senses and realized you'd have to compromise in order to make the lawsuit go away.