Legal Opinion
Noske v. Friedberg
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided November 6, 2003No. C7-02-1073PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAGE, Justice.
In 2001, respondent James Noske commenced an action against appellant Joseph Friedberg for attorney malpractice arising out of Friedberg’s representation of Noske at Noske’s 1990 criminal trial for second-degree assault. The district court dismissed the action, finding that the six-year statute of limitations for bringing an attorney malpractice claim had run. The court of appeals reversed, concluding that Noske’s cause of action did not accrue until he was granted habeas corpus relief by the federal district court in 1999. We affirm the court of appeals.
In July of 1989,…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Stevens v. BisphamOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Gebhardt v. O'ROURKEMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
- Steele v. KehoeSupreme Court of Florida · 1999
- Martens v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Park Nicollet Clinic v. HamannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- Dwight Mitchell v. Dakota County Social ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2020
- Rantz v. KaufmanSupreme Court of Colorado · 2005
- Sanchez v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
- Jerry's Enterprises, Inc. v. Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.