Defending Against Summary Judgment in Texas Legal Malpractice Cases: Expert Testimony and Evidentiary Challenges
Legal Malpractice
Summary judgment can end a Texas legal malpractice claim before a jury hears a single witness. The defendant does not need to prove that the lawyer handled the underlying matter correctly. Instead, the defendant may prevail by showing that the plaintiff lacks admissible evidence of duty, breach, causation, or damages.
Texas legal malpractice lawyers must therefore develop the evidentiary record before a summary judgment motion is filed.
Every Challenged Element Must Be Answered
Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a, a defendant may file either a traditional or no-evidence motion for summary judgment.
A traditional motion argues that the evidence conclusively defeats an element of the plaintiff’s claim or establishes a complete defense. A no-evidence motion asserts that the plaintiff lacks sufficient proof of one or more essential elements after an adequate time for discovery.
The plaintiff must address every ground raised in the motion. A response that proves breach but fails to establish causation may still result in dismissal. Texas legal malpractice attorneys should match each challenged element with supporting testimony, documents, and relevant legal authority.
The response and supporting evidence must also be filed within the applicable deadline. Because courts generally do not receive live testimony during summary judgment hearings, the written record must contain everything needed to create a genuine dispute of material fact.
Opinion Testimony Must Explain the Reasoning
Opinion testimony is often necessary to establish the standard of care and explain how the defendant lawyer’s conduct fell below it. It may also be required to prove that the error caused a different and less favorable result in the underlying matter.
Under Texas Rule of Evidence 702, a qualified witness may provide opinion testimony when specialized knowledge will assist the court or jury.
However, qualifications alone are not enough. The witness must identify the relevant facts, explain the applicable professional standard, and connect the lawyer’s conduct to the claimed financial loss.
In Starwood Management, LLC v. Swaim, the Texas Supreme Court explained that a summary judgment affidavit must show how the supporting facts lead to the stated conclusion. A legal malpractice attorney cannot rely on an affidavit that merely declares that the defendant was negligent without explaining why.
Evidentiary Objections Can Eliminate Critical Proof
The defense may object that an affidavit is conclusory, speculative, based on hearsay, or outside the witness’s qualifications. It may also challenge emails, billing records, contracts, transcripts, or business records that have not been properly authenticated.
A Houston legal malpractice attorney should confirm that each affidavit:
- Is based on personal knowledge
- Establishes the witness’s qualifications
- Identifies the materials reviewed
- Explains the factual basis for each opinion
- Connects the alleged breach to the plaintiff’s damages
The plaintiff may also need evidence from the underlying case, including pleadings, orders, deposition transcripts, correspondence, financial records, and settlement documents. These materials help prove what should have occurred if the original lawyer had acted competently.
The Underlying Case Must Be Reconstructed
Many malpractice claims require the plaintiff to prove the “case within a case.” This means showing that the client probably would have obtained a better outcome but for the lawyer’s mistake.
Kassab’s legal malpractice case results include Broussard v. Donaldson, which involved an alleged failure to designate necessary testimony concerning defective residential construction. The malpractice action was later resolved before trial for a substantial confidential amount.
That result demonstrates why proper witness designation and admissible supporting evidence can determine both the original claim and the later malpractice case. A legal malpractice attorney in Dallas, Texas, must be prepared to prove not only that a mistake occurred, but also that the mistake caused a recoverable loss.
Keep the Malpractice Claim Before the Texas Court
Defeating summary judgment requires timely, element-specific, and admissible evidence. The Kassab Law Firm represents individuals and businesses pursuing claims against negligent attorneys throughout Texas. Contact us today to have legal malpractice lawyers in Houston assess the motion, the evidentiary record, and the legal strategy needed to keep your case moving forward.