Shelden v. Grossman
Plaintiff sued the estate planning attorney and law firm used by her mother and stepfather. Father claimed that counsel and the firm engaged in malpractice, conspiracy to breach their fiduciary duties, and conspiracy to commit fraud. The trial court dismissed the action after sustaining the demurrer to the Third Amended Complaint without leave to amend. On appeal, father challenges the trial court's ruling on the demurrer on the grounds that the causes of action was not barred by the statute of limitations, and requests leave to amend the complaint if pleading infirmities are identified. Court affirms.
Comments on Shelden v. Grossman