Fogarty Law Group PLLCFogarty Law Group PLLC2026-06-30T04:32:55Zhttps://www.fogartylawgroup.com/feed/atom/WordPress/wp-content/uploads/sites/1504676/2025/09/cropped-favicon-fogarty512-32x32.pngOn Behalf of Fogarty Law Group PLLC<![CDATA[Missed deadlines, lost cases: when Washington attorney errors cost you everything]]>https://www.fogartylawgroup.com/?p=475252026-06-30T04:32:55Z2026-06-30T04:32:55ZFatal errors: missed timelines and procedural failures
Every civil cause of action in Washington is governed by a statutory deadline under the Revised Code of Washington. Standard personal injury claims and oral contract disputes must be filed within three years. A missed deadline requires the court to grant a motion to dismiss, and the right to pursue the claim is permanently lost.
Other procedural failures can produce the same result:
Summary judgment default: Missing the mandatory window to file a responsive brief under Washington Superior Court Civil Rule 56 allows a court to rule entirely in the opposing party's favor without the merits of the case ever being heard.
Appellate deadline: Failing to file a Notice of Appeal within the 30-day window permanently extinguishes the right to challenge a trial court's ruling.
These failures share a common feature: they cannot be undone through a later motion or correction, which is what makes attorney errors of this type so consequential.
Proving legal malpractice in Washington
A Washington legal malpractice claim requires establishing four elements: the existence of an attorney-client relationship, a breach of the professional standard of care, a direct causal link between the breach and the client's harm, and quantifiable damages.
The most demanding aspect of this framework is what courts call the "case within a case" doctrine. To prevail, the client must essentially relitigate the underlying matter and demonstrate that they would have won, and recovered a specific amount, but for the attorney's error. This requires building two parallel factual records simultaneously.
One important protection for affected clients is the Continuous Representation Rule. Under Washington law, the three-year statute of limitations for legal malpractice does not begin to run while the attorney continues to represent the client on the same matter. This tolling rule gives clients additional time to recognize that an error occurred and take action.
Other actionable breaches beyond missed deadlines include failing to depose key witnesses within the case schedule and entering unauthorized settlements without the client's informed consent.
If you believe a prior attorney's errors compromised your case, speaking with an experienced Washington legal malpractice attorney as early as possible gives you the best opportunity to evaluate what was lost and whether a viable malpractice claim exists.
]]>On Behalf of Fogarty Law Group PLLC<![CDATA[Partnership disputes in Washington State: a guide to boardroom deadlocks]]>https://www.fogartylawgroup.com/?p=475192026-06-26T03:40:44Z2026-06-26T03:40:44ZFiduciary duties under Washington's partnership act
Business partners owe each other enforceable legal duties under the Washington Uniform Partnership Act. Misconduct generally falls into two core statutory categories:
Duty of loyalty: Partners must act in the best interest of the partnership. Using partnership funds for personal benefit, taking a business opportunity that belongs to the partnership, or competing against the partnership without written consent all constitute violations of this duty.
Duty of care: Partners are required to refrain from grossly negligent or reckless conduct, intentional misconduct, or knowing violations of the law in carrying out partnership business.
Washington courts also recognize freeze-out tactics as a form of actionable misconduct. When a majority partner attempts to isolate a minority partner by cutting off financial access or unilaterally eliminating their compensation, courts can provide immediate relief to the affected partner.
Legal remedies for partnership disputes
Before filing a lawsuit, a thorough review of the partnership agreement or LLC operating agreement is essential. These documents often contain mandatory arbitration clauses, buy-sell provisions, or defined expulsion procedures that shape the available legal strategy.
When negotiation fails, several targeted remedies are available depending on the circumstances:
A Temporary Restraining Order to freeze unauthorized financial transactions while the dispute is pending.
A formal action for a court-ordered accounting to establish the true financial state of the partnership.
A derivative lawsuit filed on behalf of the entity to recover damages caused by a partner's breach of duty.
Judicial dissolution, which allows a court to appoint a receiver to wind down the business and distribute assets when the partnership deadlock is permanent and irresolvable.
Understanding which remedy fits the specific facts of a dispute requires careful legal analysis before any action is taken.
The earlier legal counsel is involved in a partnership dispute, the more options remain available to resolve it without full-scale litigation destroying the business in the process. A Washington business litigation attorney can review your governing documents, evaluate potential breaches, and build a strategy that protects both your investment and your professional future.
]]>