|
4381 A law firm's obligation to indemnify an attorney in its employ for expenses incurred in defending a malpractice suit against him is limited to defense costs arising from malpractice that allegedly occurred while it employed the attorney; the employee has the burden of showing what part should be apportioned to that period, but the law firm is not entitled to summary judgment in the attorney-employee's action for indemnity unless it shows that the attorney did not possess, and could not obtain, evidence proving that any of the costs were incurred for conduct that occurred while in the firm's employ.
CASSADY v MORGAN, LEWIS ... (Malpractice Indemnity) 145 CA4 220 [See: LabC 2802; Plancarte v Guardsmark 118 CA4 640, T/AT 6/04]
|
|