By
updated 4/22/2004 2:16:16 PM ET 2004-04-22T18:16:16

Kudos to the California Supreme Court for forcing lawyers to evaluate whether they’re involved in silly or frivolous cases. The question the court faced was ic lawyers can be sued for malicious prosecution if, after they file a case, they learn their lawsuit is not “supported by probable cause.”

What this means is that if lawyers later figure out that they filed a frivolous lawsuit, do they have to stop? Might they have to pay? The court’s answer was 'yes.'

I support anything that forces lawyers to take some responsibility and  avoids allowing them to just say, "Well, I’m just representing my client...."  Of course, on the other side, some lawyers fought hard to avoid liability saying that this will lead lawyers to “second-guess their cases.”

What’s wrong with that?

This means California is now in the majority on this issue. Now it’s just time to start filing some cases and holding more lawyers responsible for wasting taxpayer dollars on time-consuming and harassing cases that only serve to embarrass the legal profession and clog our legal system.

Dan Abrams is the host of 'The Abrams Report.' 'The Abrams Report' airs weeknights, 6 p.m. ETon MSNBC.

Discuss:

Discussion comments

,