diligence exercised by attorneys practicing in this community or locality." (3) "Liability will be imposed for a want of such skill, prudence and diligence as lawyers of ordinary skill and capacity commonly possess and exercise."
One example to be used in describing the liability of attorneys for malpractice is that of Michigan. The standard of care attaches when the attorney/client relationship begins (such as when the attorney accepts a retainer from this client). The basic elements of malpractice are duty, general standard of care, specific standard of care, and damages. In order to be held liable for malpractice, an attorney must first be found to have breached a duty owed to that particular client. Thus, there must have been a legal obligation on the part of the attorney arising from the relationship between the attorney and the client. Moreover, this duty encompasses whether the attorney obligated to perform the duty conformed to the legal standard of reasonable conduct in light of the apparent and applicable circumstances. This means that the attorney's conduct must have created a risk of harm to the client and that risk was foreseeable. This tends to mean that courts will reject that notion that an attorney owed a duty to an adverse party in litigation. Thus, for example, an attorney will owe no duty to an adverse party to conduct a reasonable investigation of the facts and the applicable law in order to determine whether a client has a tenable claim and to refrain from filing a frivolous law suit. Creation of such a duty would also create a conflict of interest and would seriously hamper the attorney's performance as counsel for his client.
With regard to the standard of care, Michigan courts have stated that "an attorney must bring to bear the skill, learning, and ability of the average practitioner of law when conducting legal business for a client." In addition, an attorney "must exercise ordinary...