McGuire v. Fitzsimmons
1996 W. Va. LEXIS 119, 475 S.E.2d 132, 197 W. Va. 132 (1996)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
In a legal malpractice action, venue is proper where the cause of action arose. A cause of action for legal malpractice arises not only where the attorney performs the negligent act, but also where the client suffers the resulting harm or substantial damage.
Facts:
- George and Judith McGuire, residents of Monongalia County, hired attorney Robert P. Fitzsimmons, whose office was in Ohio County, for a potential medical malpractice action.
- The parties met once at Fitzsimmons' office in Ohio County.
- All subsequent communication between January 1991 and September 1992 occurred via telephone and mail between Monongalia and Ohio counties.
- On September 24, 1992, Fitzsimmons telephoned the McGuires in Monongalia County to inform them he could not represent them.
- Fitzsimmons then mailed a draft complaint from his Ohio County office to the McGuires in Monongalia County.
- The McGuires filed the complaint themselves in Monongalia County, but it was dismissed because the statute of limitations had already expired.
Procedural Posture:
- George and Judith McGuire filed a legal malpractice suit against Robert P. Fitzsimmons and his law firm in the Circuit Court of Monongalia County (a trial court).
- The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, alleging that venue was improper in Monongalia County.
- The Circuit Court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss, finding venue to be proper.
- Upon the defendants' motion, the Circuit Court certified a question regarding the proper venue to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia (the state's highest court).
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a cause of action for legal malpractice arise for venue purposes in the county where the clients reside, sustained their injury (the dismissal of their underlying suit), and received communications from their attorney, even if the attorney's office is located in a different county?
Opinions:
Majority - McHugh, Chief Justice
Yes. In a legal malpractice action, the cause of action arises for venue purposes where any key part of the claim occurred, including where the substantial damage was sustained. This means venue can be proper in more than one county. The court's reasoning analogizes legal malpractice to contract actions, where venue can lie where the duty was created, where the duty was breached, or where the damage from the breach occurred. Here, while the attorney's employment may have begun in Ohio County, the alleged malpractice had no effect until the McGuires were damaged in Monongalia County by the dismissal of their underlying suit. Therefore, part of the cause of action arose in Monongalia County, making venue proper there.
Analysis:
This decision significantly expands the potential venues for legal malpractice plaintiffs in West Virginia. By ruling that the 'cause of action' arises not just where the attorney's negligent act occurred but also where the client suffers the harm, the court gives plaintiffs the strategic advantage of often being able to sue in their home county. This interpretation moves away from a rigid, defendant-centric view of venue and aligns it with a more modern, plaintiff-focused approach that considers the location of the injury. Future malpractice litigation will likely see more plaintiffs choosing their home forum, rather than being forced to litigate in the county where their former attorney resides or has their office.
