legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Kelly v. Millard
We consider when the plaintiff in a malpractice action had knowledge or should have had knowledge of the alleged wrongdoing by her attorneys in the underlying action, and when she suffered actual injury. We conclude the trial court correctly determined plaintiffs malpractice action was untimely filed because plaintiff had knowledge of her attorneys allegedly wrongful or negligent acts or omissions more than one year before the malpractice action was filed. Additionally, Court conclude the limitations period was not tolled, because plaintiff suffered actual injury at the time of the attorneys alleged wrongdoing, not when the underlying action was later settled. Therefore, Court affirm the judgment following the trial courts order sustaining the attorneys demurrers without leave to amend. There is no contention by plaintiff that the trial court erred by declining to permit amendment.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale