Sola v. Clostermann
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.
In this legal malpractice claim, the amended complaint alleges that defendants, attorneys at law, were negligent when they represented plaintiffs in a previous lawsuit by failing to file a timely notice of appeal. As in all legal malpractice cases, we are involved with a lawsuit within a lawsuit. To prevail on the present claim, plaintiffs must show that they would have won on the appeal of the previous case, which is a question of law. Thus, we are in substantially the same position we would have been in reviewing the judgment in the first case had defendants filed a timely appeal for…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Chocktoot v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1977
- Harding v. BellOregon Supreme Court · 1973
- In re the Accounting of the Bank of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- Haskell v. Wilmington Trust CompanySupreme Court of Delaware · 1973
- Bock v. ZittenfieldCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Helmbrecht v. St. Paul InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1985
- Millhouse v. WiesenthalTexas Supreme Court · 1989
- Floyd v. KoskoCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1985
- Hoekstre v. Golden B. Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1985
- Harris v. KisslingCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.