2
in damages.
1
Vazquez appeals,
2
claiming that he is entitled to a
new trial because his lawyer committed legal malpractice in
numerous respects and, "due to personal conflicts and a
personality clash, squandered [his] opportunity for a fair[,]
impartial jury trial."
We conclude there is no basis on which Vazquez is entitled
to a new trial. First, to the extent that Vazquez argues his
attorney committed malpractice, a claim for which we discern no
support, the proper remedy is not to grant a new trial. A
malpractice claim against an attorney is an independent cause of
action that Vazquez would have to pursue against his attorney
separately. Second, Vazquez's arguments that certain medical
records related to his treatment were improperly admitted and a
police report prepared in connection with the accident was
improperly excluded are raised for the first time on appeal and,
therefore, are waived. See Boss v. Leverett, 484 Mass. 553,
562-563 (2020). In any event, even if we were to consider them,
1
The judgment reflects that the amount awarded by the jury
was reduced by $2,866.22 to account for personal injury
protection (PIP) coverage. Prejudgment interest in the amount
of $5,438.91 and $350 in statutory costs were added to the
award, and a final judgment in the amount of $25,422.69 was
entered on December 8, 2021.
2
Approximately one year after judgment entered, Vazquez
filed a motion "for release from judgment" pursuant to Mass. R.
Civ. P. 60 (b) (2) and (6), 365 Mass. 828 (1974), which was
denied. He did not file a notice of appeal from the order and,
therefore, nothing related to that order is before us.
