Beck v. Wecht
California Supreme Court
28 Cal. 4th 289, 48 P.3d 417, 121 Cal. Rptr. 2d 384 (2002)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
Clients retained attorney Daniel Beck (plaintiff) in a products-liability suit against General Motors (GM). Beck asked attorney L. L. McBee to join as co-counsel and agreed that McBee would receive approximately half the contingent fee. Beck and McBee then associated attorney Ronald Wecht and his law firm (collectively, Wecht) (defendant) as local counsel for a 10 percent cut. Before trial, the relationship among the attorneys eroded. McBee accused Beck of undermining settlement negotiations, while Beck accused McBee of alienating him from his clients. By trial, Beck was an observer, not a participant. During trial, GM made a $6 million settlement offer that the clients told Wecht and McBee they wanted to take, but McBee failed to contact GM and accept the offer. After the jury found for GM, the clients sued McBee and Wecht for malpractice. The clients obtained a settlement from Wecht’s insurance carrier and also from McBee, who paid Beck $224,000 out of the settlement to release Beck’s claims against McBee. Beck then sued Wecht to recover the rest of the fees Beck would have recovered had the case settled for $6 million. The trial court entered summary judgment for Wecht, and the appellate court affirmed. Beck appealed to the California Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Brown, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
