|
p0555 The finding of an arbitrator who decided a fee dispute between attorney and client under the Mandatory Fee Arbitration Act and who determined that the attorney had reasonably performed services for the client did not have the effect of issue preclusion (i.e., res judicata; collateral estoppel) in a subsequent action for attorney malpractice brought by the client against the attorney.
LISKA v ARNS LAW FIRM (Arbitration Issue Preclusion) 117 CA4 275 [See: B&PC 6200 etseq; Vandenberg v Superior Court 21 C4 815, T/AT 10/99]
|
|