I just noticed a fiend has filed a discretionary petition to a very high court, for which a flat payment might be paid, prior to any time having passed from the decision review is sought from having been filed.
No oral argument is indicated to have occured nor is there evident any other way early access to the decision appealed from could of been obtained.
Counsel was appointed after the appealed from verdict was untimely appealed from but that issue was not raised by other then original winners (appellee's).
I know the act is hostile to the client- my question is has the general issue been reviewed in malpractice law? Although counsel can NOT assume they will be relieved (discharged) if they ask, and can get in trouble for asking even, can the alternative, '__immediately__' saying I've tried but can't find cause (as the rule allows), denying ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY FROM DEVELOPING AND FAILING TO DILIGENTLY MONITOR FOR THAT, malpractice itself? When a tiny fraction of the time is up?
Tags: