Daugert v. Pappas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• providing that a patient’s misdiagnosis deprives that patient of a chance of surviving, but not willing to expand the loss of chance of survival claim in legal malpractice matters because there is no lost chance to a client who can still have their case reviewed by a higher court
• the second trier of fact is asked to decide what a reasonable factfinder would have done
• claim must be based on more than mere speculation and conjecture to satisfy the \but for\ test.
• claim must be based on more than mere speculation and conjecture to satisfy the “but for” test.
• “determination of what decision would have followed if the attorney had timely filed the petition for review is a question of law for the judge, irrespective of whether the facts are undisputed.”
• refusing to extend lost chance doctrine to legal malpractice actions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).