DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT - PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE

STATE OF OREGON

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

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. OREGON-SPECIFIC LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Governing Law

Professional malpractice claims in Oregon are governed by common law negligence principles and ORS Chapter 12. Key precedents include Stevens v. Bispham, 316 Or. 221 (1993) and Mastro v. French, 187 Or. App. 605 (2003).

B. Statute of Limitations

Professional Malpractice: Under ORS Section 12.110(1), actions for professional malpractice must be commenced within two (2) years from the date the plaintiff discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the injury.

Statute of Repose: Under ORS Section 12.115, no action may be commenced more than six (6) years after the date of the act or omission giving rise to the claim, regardless of discovery.

Legal Malpractice: The statute runs from the date the client discovers or should have discovered the harm. Stevens v. Bispham, 316 Or. 221 (1993).

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

C. Comparative Negligence

Oregon follows a modified comparative negligence system under ORS Section 31.600. A plaintiff may recover damages only if their fault is not greater than the combined fault of all persons. If the plaintiff is 51% or more at fault, recovery is completely barred.

D. Standard of Care Under Oregon Law

Under Oregon law, a professional must exercise the degree of care, skill, and diligence that is ordinarily exercised by professionals in the same field under similar circumstances. Onita Pacific Corp. v. Trustees of Bronson, 315 Or. 149 (1992).

Key Case Law:

• Attorneys: Must exercise the knowledge, skill, and care ordinarily possessed and exercised by attorneys in good standing. Stevens v. Bispham, 316 Or. 221 (1993).
• Accountants: Must perform services in accordance with GAAP and GAAS standards. Onita Pacific Corp., 315 Or. 149.
• Engineers/Architects: Must exercise the skill and care customarily used by practitioners in the profession. Hanna v. Huer Johns Neel, Inc., 101 Or. App. 693 (1990).

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.

Stevens v. Bispham, 316 Or. 221 (1993).

Exception: Expert testimony is not required when the professional's negligence is within the common knowledge of laypersons.

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

Oregon does not impose statutory caps on economic damages in professional malpractice cases. Non-economic damages may be subject to constitutional limitations.

G. Privity and Third-Party Claims

Legal Malpractice: Generally requires an attorney-client relationship. Oregon may recognize claims by intended third-party beneficiaries. Hale v. Groce, 304 Or. 281 (1987).

Accountant Malpractice: Third parties may recover under certain circumstances. Onita Pacific Corp., 315 Or. 149 (adopted Restatement approach).

H. Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Oregon recognizes breach of fiduciary duty as a separate cause of action. 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 Oregon law. Wyndham v. Paredes, 129 Or. App. 484 (1994).

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 Oregon law, [Defendant Professional] was required to exercise the degree of care, skill, and diligence that is ordinarily exercised by [profession type] under 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. Stevens v. Bispham, 316 Or. 221 (1993).

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 9% per annum per ORS Section 82.010
• 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. Pacific 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 Oregon.

We are prepared to litigate this matter in the Circuit Court of [County] County, Oregon 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]
Oregon State Bar No. [Number]
Attorney for [Client Name]

ENCLOSURES: As noted above

cc: [Client Name]
File

OREGON PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE PRACTICE NOTES

• Two-Year Discovery Period: Actions must be brought within 2 years from discovery.

• Six-Year Statute of Repose: Absolute bar on claims more than 6 years from the act or omission.

• Modified Comparative Fault: Recovery barred if plaintiff is 51% or more at fault.

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

• No Economic Damage Caps: No statutory limits on economic damages.

• Prejudgment Interest: 9% per annum per ORS Section 82.010.

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

• Onita Pacific Doctrine: Third-party accountant claims analyzed under Restatement approach.

• Mediation: Courts may require mediation or other ADR.

• Punitive Damages: Available for clear and convincing evidence of malice.

This template is specific to Oregon law. Professional malpractice claims require careful attention to the discovery rule and statute of repose. Always verify current law and consult with qualified Oregon counsel.