DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT - PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

[FIRM NAME]
Attorneys at Law
[Street Address]
[City, North Carolina ZIP]
Telephone: [Phone]
Facsimile: [Fax]
Email: [Email]
Licensed in the State of North Carolina

DATE: [Date]

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
AND FIRST-CLASS MAIL

[Professional / Firm Name]
[Professional Liability Insurance Carrier]
[Street Address]
[City, State ZIP]

RE: PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM - SETTLEMENT DEMAND
Claimant: [Client Full Name]
Date(s) of Negligent Service: [Date or Date Range]
Professional(s): [Professional Name(s) and License Type]
Matter/Project: [Description]
Claim Number: [If assigned]

Dear [Recipient Name]:

This firm represents [Client Name] in connection with the professional malpractice committed by [Professional/Firm Name] in [his/her/their] provision of [type of professional services] services. This letter constitutes formal notice of our client's claim and our demand for settlement.

I. NORTH CAROLINA-SPECIFIC LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Governing Law

Professional malpractice claims in North Carolina are governed by common law negligence principles. Key precedents include Rorrer v. Cooke, 313 N.C. 338 (1985) and Barker v. Dowdy, 114 N.C. App. 234 (1994).

B. Statute of Limitations

Professional Malpractice: Under N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 1-52(5), actions for professional malpractice must be commenced within three (3) years from the date of the act or omission giving rise to the claim.

Discovery Rule: North Carolina applies a discovery rule for professional malpractice claims. The limitations period begins when the plaintiff discovers or should have discovered the injury and its causal relationship to the defendant's conduct. Black v. Littlejohn, 312 N.C. 626 (1985).

Legal Malpractice: The statute runs from the date the plaintiff discovers or should have discovered the negligence and resulting harm. Barker v. Dowdy, 114 N.C. App. 234 (1994).

Relevant Dates in This Matter:
- Date(s) of negligent services: [Date(s)]
- Date of discovery: [Date]
- Three-year limitations period expires: [Date]

C. Contributory Negligence - CRITICAL

North Carolina is one of only four U.S. jurisdictions that still follows the doctrine of pure contributory negligence. Under this doctrine, if the plaintiff is found to have contributed to their injury in any degree whatsoever, they are completely barred from recovery. Smith v. Fiber Controls Corp., 300 N.C. 669 (1980).

Our investigation has determined that our client was in no way negligent or contributorily at fault for the damages sustained. Our client fully cooperated with the professional and had no role in causing or contributing to the malpractice.

D. Standard of Care Under North Carolina Law

Under North Carolina law, a professional must exercise the degree of care and skill reasonably expected of a reasonably prudent practitioner in the same field under the same or similar circumstances. Rorrer v. Cooke, 313 N.C. 338 (1985).

Key Case Law:

• Attorneys: Must exercise the skill and care normally exercised by members of the legal profession. Rorrer v. Cooke, 313 N.C. 338 (1985).
• Accountants: Must perform services in accordance with GAAP and GAAS standards and exercise reasonable professional care. Raritan River Steel Co. v. Cherry, Bekaert & Holland, 322 N.C. 200 (1988).
• Engineers/Architects: Must exercise the skill and care customarily used by practitioners in the profession. Davidson & Jones, Inc. v. County of New Hanover, 41 N.C. App. 661 (1979).

E. Expert Witness Requirements

Expert testimony is generally required in professional malpractice cases to establish:
1. The applicable standard of care;
2. That the defendant breached that standard; and
3. That the breach proximately caused the plaintiff's damages.

Rorrer v. Cooke, 313 N.C. 338 (1985).

Exception: Expert testimony is not required when the professional's negligence is so obvious that a layperson can determine it without specialized knowledge.

Certification: We have retained a qualified expert who has reviewed the relevant documents and has concluded that the applicable standard of care was breached and that such breach proximately caused our client's damages.

F. Damage Caps

North Carolina does not impose statutory caps on damages in professional malpractice cases.

G. Privity and Third-Party Claims

Legal Malpractice: Generally requires an attorney-client relationship. North Carolina courts have recognized limited exceptions in narrow circumstances. Noble v. Hooker, 72 N.C. App. 1 (1984).

Accountant Malpractice: Third parties may recover under certain circumstances. North Carolina follows a limited approach to third-party liability. Raritan River Steel Co. v. Cherry, Bekaert & Holland, 322 N.C. 200 (1988).

H. Breach of Fiduciary Duty

North Carolina recognizes breach of fiduciary duty as a separate cause of action. Dalton v. Camp, 353 N.C. 647 (2001). Professionals who occupy positions of trust owe fiduciary duties to their clients.

II. PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE - LITIGATION HOLD

YOU ARE HEREBY DIRECTED TO PRESERVE ALL EVIDENCE relating to services provided to [Client Name], including but not limited to:

• Complete client file (paper and electronic)
• All correspondence and communications
• Work product, drafts, and notes
• Billing records and time entries
• Engagement letters and contracts
• Emails and electronic communications
• Calendar entries and scheduling records
• Internal memoranda and analysis
• Research materials
• Any recorded statements
• Professional liability insurance policies
• Quality control and review documentation

Modification, destruction, or concealment of any records will result in claims for spoliation, sanctions, and adverse inference instructions under North Carolina law. McLain v. Taco Bell Corp., 137 N.C. App. 179 (2000).

III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. Engagement and Relationship

[Client Name] engaged [Professional/Firm Name] on or about [Date] to provide [type of professional services]:

Nature of Engagement:
- [Description of services to be provided]
- [Scope of representation/engagement]
- [Key objectives]

Fee Arrangement:
- [Description of fee arrangement]
- [Total fees paid: $Amount]

B. Chronology of Negligent Services

[Date]: [Describe what occurred]

[Date]: [Describe what occurred]

[Date]: [Describe what occurred]

C. The Professional Error(s)

[Describe specifically what the professional(s) did wrong]

D. Discovery of Malpractice

Our client [did not discover / could not have reasonably discovered] the malpractice until [Date], when [describe discovery circumstances].

IV. STANDARD OF CARE VIOLATIONS

A. Applicable Standard of Care

Under North Carolina law, [Defendant Professional] was required to exercise the degree of care and skill reasonably expected of a reasonably prudent [profession type] under the same or similar circumstances.

Based on our expert's analysis, the applicable standard of care required [Defendant] to:

1. [Standard 1]
2. [Standard 2]
3. [Standard 3]

B. Breaches of the Standard of Care

Breach 1: [Detailed description of breach]

Breach 2: [Detailed description of breach]

Breach 3: [Detailed description of breach]

C. Expert Opinion

We have retained [Expert Name], a [licensed/certified] [profession] with [number] years of experience in [relevant area]. [Expert Name] has concluded that:

1. [Defendant Professional] breached the applicable standard of care;
2. These breaches were a direct and proximate cause of [Client Name]'s damages; and
3. Had appropriate professional services been rendered, [describe avoided outcome].

V. CAUSATION

A. "But For" Causation

But for the defendant's breach of the standard of care, our client would not have suffered the damages described herein. This claim satisfies the "but for" test for actual causation.

B. Proximate Causation

The defendant's professional negligence was a proximate cause of our client's damages. The harm suffered was a foreseeable consequence of the defendant's breach of duty.

C. Case-Within-A-Case (If Applicable to Legal Malpractice)

[If legal malpractice:] We are prepared to prove that but for counsel's negligence, the underlying matter would have resulted in a more favorable outcome for our client. Rorrer v. Cooke, 313 N.C. 338 (1985).

D. No Contributory Negligence

Our client was not contributorily negligent in any manner. The defendant alone is responsible for the damages sustained.

VI. DAMAGES

A. Direct Financial Losses

As a direct and proximate result of the defendant's professional negligence, our client has suffered:

Primary Damages:
- [Loss 1]: $[Amount]
- [Loss 2]: $[Amount]
- [Loss 3]: $[Amount]

B. Consequential Damages

C. Professional Fees Paid

D. Interest and Incidental Costs

• Prejudgment interest at 8% per annum per N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 24-1
• Court costs and filing fees
• Expert witness fees

E. Summary of Damages

VII. SETTLEMENT DEMAND

Based upon the clear breach of professional standards, the extent of our client's damages, and the strength of liability evidence, we hereby demand:

$[DEMAND AMOUNT]

This demand will remain open for thirty (30) days from the date of this letter, expiring at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on [Expiration Date].

VIII. RESPONSE AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED

Please provide:

1. All professional liability insurance policies applicable to this claim
2. Policy limits for each applicable policy
3. Any self-insured retention amounts
4. Excess/umbrella coverage information
5. Consent to extend statute of limitations during settlement discussions

IX. DOCUMENTATION ENCLOSED

• Engagement agreement/retainer
• Correspondence between client and professional
• Work product demonstrating errors
• Documentation of damages
• Expert curriculum vitae
• Chronology of events

X. CONCLUSION

This case presents clear professional negligence that caused significant financial harm to our client. The defendant's conduct fell below the standard of care required of [profession type] in North Carolina. North Carolina's contributory negligence doctrine does not apply because our client had no role in causing or contributing to the malpractice.

We are prepared to litigate this matter in the Superior Court of [County] County, North Carolina if necessary. However, we believe early resolution serves all parties' interests.

Please respond by the deadline stated above.

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

By: _________________________________
[Attorney Name]
North Carolina State Bar No. [Number]
Attorney for [Client Name]

ENCLOSURES: As noted above

cc: [Client Name]
File

NORTH CAROLINA PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE PRACTICE NOTES

• Contributory Negligence: North Carolina is one of only four jurisdictions following pure contributory negligence - ANY plaintiff fault bars recovery entirely.

• Three-Year Limitations Period: Actions must be brought within 3 years from the act or omission.

• Discovery Rule: Limitations period runs from when plaintiff discovered or should have discovered the injury.

• Expert Testimony Required: Expert witness is generally necessary except for obvious negligence.

• No Damage Caps: No statutory limits on professional malpractice damages.

• Prejudgment Interest: 8% per annum per N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 24-1.

• Venue: Superior Court in county where defendant resides or where cause of action arose.

• Business Court: Complex commercial cases may be designated to the Business Court.

• Punitive Damages: Available for fraud, malice, or willful/wanton conduct per N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 1D-15.

• Mediation: Court-ordered mediation is common in North Carolina.

This template is specific to North Carolina law. Professional malpractice claims in North Carolina are subject to the state's strict contributory negligence doctrine. Always verify current law and consult with qualified North Carolina counsel.