Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Bell v. Hummel

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 26, 1982No. Civ. 61290PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

O’BRIEN, J. *

This is an appeal from the March 19, 1980, order dismissing the action as to defendants James E. Hummel, Robert W. Nowack, and Nowack & Hummel (respondents). The order followed the sustaining of said defendants’ demurrer, without leave to amend, to the second amended complaint for legal malpractice.

Facts

Plaintiffs Grover Cleveland Bell (appellant) and Pearl Elizabeth Bell, husband and wife, brought a legal malpractice action against respondents for the failure to assert a valid claim for damages on their behalf in a previous action against a doctor for medical malpractice.…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Neel v. Magana, Olney, Levy, Cathcart & GelfandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Budd v. NixenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Wells v. Marina City Properties, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Rosefield Packing Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Goldtree v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Laird v. BlackerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Colbert v. Georgetown UniversityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
  3. Knight v. FurlowDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. Grunwald v. BronkeshSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1993
  5. California Sansome Co. Polk Market Co. v. U.S. Gypsum W.R. Grace & Company,--Conn.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API