Vithlani v. McMahon
Dilip Vithlani filed a collection action against a former client, Arnold McMahon, who refused to pay his legal bills. McMahon filed a cross-complaint against Vithlani. After ruling on several pretrial motions, the trial court entered judgment in Vithlanis favor in both actions. On appeal, McMahon asserts the trial court erroneously: (1) sustained Vithlanis demurrer to four claims in McMahons cross-complaint without leave to amend; (2) refused to allow McMahon to amend his cross-complaint by adding a new legal malpractice claim; (3) denied McMahons ex parte request to continue the summary judgment motion to conduct further discovery; (4) granted Vithlanis summary judgment motion as to his collection action because there was a triable issue as to Vithlanis legal incompetence; (5) allowed Vithlani to submit confidential attorney/client communications as evidence to support his summary judgment motion; (6) deemed Vithlanis motion for change of venue moot; and (7) failed to consider an argument raised in McMahons untimely corrected declaration in opposition to the summary judgment motion. Court conclude each of his contentions lack merit. The judgment is affirmed.
Comments on Vithlani v. McMahon