In that case, the lawyer was hired to pursue certain disability benefit claims for a disability that arose as a result of a motor vehicle accident. A finding was made that the lawyer was only hired for the specific purpose of pursuing the disability benefit claims and the duty did not extend beyond that on the facts of the case. A key feature in that case was that the lawyer and client actually discussed the issue of the scope and nature of the retainer. The plaintiff/client instructed the lawyer that she did not wish to issue a lawsuit in the motor vehicle accident because her brother-in-law was the driver: See Broesky v. Lüst, supra, at para. 13.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.