<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ECC Capital Corp. Sues Law Firms for Contract-Drafting Malpractice</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.adamsdrafting.com/2010/02/04/ecc-capital-corp-sues-law-firms-for-contract-drafting-malpractice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.adamsdrafting.com/2010/02/04/ecc-capital-corp-sues-law-firms-for-contract-drafting-malpractice/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 01:23:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cliff Tuttle</title>
		<link>http://www.adamsdrafting.com/2010/02/04/ecc-capital-corp-sues-law-firms-for-contract-drafting-malpractice/comment-page-1/#comment-94780</link>
		<dc:creator>Cliff Tuttle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 23:56:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adamsdrafting.com/?p=2205#comment-94780</guid>
		<description>Two things occur to me. (1) Isn&#039;t draft agreement usually sent back to the client for review and comment? (2) Doesn&#039;t a successful malpractice claim require proof that but for the error or omission the client would not have been damaged?  How do we know Bear Stearns would have accepted the terms?

CLT</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two things occur to me. (1) Isn&#8217;t draft agreement usually sent back to the client for review and comment? (2) Doesn&#8217;t a successful malpractice claim require proof that but for the error or omission the client would not have been damaged?  How do we know Bear Stearns would have accepted the terms?</p>
<p>CLT</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

