Vricic v. Martin
Filed 10/5/10 Vricic v. Martin CA2/2
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts
and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or
ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115
IN
THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
TWO
VEDRAN VRCIC,
Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.
FRANCES LOUISE MARTIN,
Defendant and Respondent.
B219700
(Los Angeles
County
Super. Ct.
No. BC334186)
APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court
of Los Angeles
County. Kevin C.
Brazile, Judge. Affirmed.
Law Offices
of Philip P. DeLuca and Philip P. DeLuca for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Nemecek
& Cole, Jonathan B. Cole, David B. Owen and Mark Schaeffer for Defendant
and Respondent.
*
* * * * *
The trial court granted judgment on the pleadings on
appellant Vedran Vrcic's legal
malpractice complaint against respondent Frances Louise Martin, based on
the one-year statute of limitations under Code of Civil Procedure section
340.6, subdivision (a).[1] The trial court determined that appellant's
causes of action accrued on the date appellant and his former wife executed a
stipulation and settlement agreement that appellant alleges was negligently
drafted by respondent, rather than at a later date when the family court
construed the agreement against appellant.
We agree with the trial court and affirm the judgment of dismissal.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Appellant's complaint alleges
the following: Appellant retained
respondent to represent him in the underlying marital dissolution case brought
by his former wife. Respondent â€
| Description | The trial court granted judgment on the pleadings on appellant Vedran Vrcic's legal malpractice complaint against respondent Frances Louise Martin, based on the one-year statute of limitations under Code of Civil Procedure section 340.6, subdivision (a).[1] The trial court determined that appellant's causes of action accrued on the date appellant and his former wife executed a stipulation and settlement agreement that appellant alleges was negligently drafted by respondent, rather than at a later date when the family court construed the agreement against appellant. Court agree with the trial court and affirm the judgment of dismissal. |
| Rating |
