Legal Opinion

Foxen v. Carpenter

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 3, 2016No. B268820PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

GRIMES, J.

Plaintiff and appellant Christine Foxen sued her former attorneys, defendants and respondents John Carpenter, Paul Zuckerman, Nicholas Rowley and Carpenter, Zuckerman & Rowley, LLP, who had represented her in a personal injury action. The trial court sustained defendants’ demurrer to plaintiffs operative first amended complaint on the basis of the statute of limitations. We conclude all of plaintiffs causes of action are time-barred as a matter of law, and therefore affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On March 25, 2015, plaintiff filed this action against defendants…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Schifando v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Aryeh v. Canon Business Solutions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2013
  4. Garcia v. McCutchenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Lee v. HanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Hayes v. Temecula Valley Unified Sch. Dist., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  2. People v. Overstock.com, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  3. Coastal Act Protectors v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022
  4. Dhillon v. Minero CA5California Court of Appeal · 2020
  5. Hasbun v. O'Connor CA2/7California Court of Appeal · 2021

6 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