Legal Opinion
Vaccaro v. Barry Kaiman
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 30, 1998No. Docket Nos. B108182, B111535, B112258PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
VOGEL (C. S.), P. J.—
Introduction
Plaintiff and appellant Andra M. Vaccaro brought this action for legal malpractice against defendants and respondents Barry Raiman and the law firm of Lewis, D’Amato, Brisbois & Bisgaard. Plaintiff’s attorney neglected to sign the first amended complaint as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7, subdivision (a). Defendants moved, pursuant to section 436, subdivision (b), that unless the first amended complaint was signed by the time of the hearing on defendants’ motion, the first amended complaint should be stricken in its entirety on the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Cisneros v. VueveCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Metropolitan Service Corp. v. Casa De Palms, Ltd.California Court of Appeal · 1995
- Reid v. BalterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
- Perlman v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
3Cited by9 opinions
- Lang v. HochmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- CLD Construction, Inc. v. City of San RamonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Carlson v. STATE DEPT. OF FISH AND GAMECalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Hoover v. West Virginia Board of MedicineWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2004
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.