Legal Opinion

Stevens v. Bispham

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 13, 1993No. CC A8904-02189; CA A64459; SC S38574PublishedCited by 181 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*223GILLETTE, J.

This is a professional negligence action brought by a former criminal defendant against the lawyer who defended him. The issue presented for our decision is this: At what point does the statute of limitations for legal malpractice begin to run with respect to a lawyer’s defense of a client who has been convicted in a criminal case? We hold that it does not begin to run until the plaintiff has been exonerated of the criminal offense through reversal on direct appeal, through post-conviction relief proceedings, or otherwise.

Plaintiff, charged with three counts of Robbery I, three…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Fazzolari v. Portland School District No. 1JOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Seeborg v. General Motors CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Krahn v. KinneyOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Krummacher v. GierloffOregon Supreme Court · 1981

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by181 opinions

  1. Peeler v. Hughes & LuceTexas Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Gebhardt v. O'ROURKEMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Steele v. KehoeSupreme Court of Florida · 1999
  4. Coscia v. McKenna & CuneoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Wiley v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998

176 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API