Zeccola v. Ezzo
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
The defendant conclusively established, without genuine issue of material fact, that the plaintiff was on actual notice of the basis of his claim for legal malpractice more than two years before the present action was filed. The summary judgment entered below for the defendant because of the bar of the statute of limitations, Section 95.-ll(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1975), is therefore affirmed. See Robinson v. Sparer, 365 So.2d 438 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Steiner v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 364 So.2d 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); compare Green v. Bartel, 365 So.2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Rosen v. Sparber, 369…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Steiner v. Ciba-Geigy Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1978
- Green v. BartelDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1978
- Rosen v. SparberDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1978
- Robinson v. SparerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1978
3Cited by1 opinion
- Pomerance v. GraggDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987