On competing motions in a legal malpractice action, the court refused to strike the defendants’ summary judgment motion in its entirety and narrowed the issues suitable for summary adjudication.
The court held that standard of care and certain causation and damages issues could proceed summarily, while broader causation questions tied to unjoined parties would require a trial-within-a-trial analysis.
The court also ruled extensively on evidentiary admissibility, striking specific affidavit paragraphs, exhibits, and will-state statements while allowing other hearsay-limited material for non-truth purposes related to knowledge and retainer scope.
The matter was directed to continue with a focused summary judgment record and a subsequent case management conference.
