Gordon v. LAW OFFICES OF AGUIRRE & NETER
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HUFFMAN, J.
J.In this legal malpractice action, the sole question is whether the doctrine of “equitable tolling” applies to Code of Civil Procedure 1 section 340.6, the applicable statute of limitations. Guided by the plain language of the statute, and our high court’s opinion in Laird v. Blacker (1992) 2 Cal.4th 606 [7 Cal.Rptr.2d 550, 828 P.2d 691], we hold section 340.6 is not subject to equitable tolling; rather, the Legislature intended the statute’s explicit tolling provisions to be exclusive. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of dismissal entered after defendants successfully…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Neel v. Magana, Olney, Levy, Cathcart & GelfandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Addison v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Budd v. NixenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Elkins v. DerbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Bollinger v. National Fire InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Guerrero v. GatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Blair v. IngHawaii Supreme Court · 2001
- Jocer Enterprises, Inc. v. PriceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Guerrero v. GatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Janik v. Rudy, Exelrod & ZieffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.