Herrmann v. McMenomy & Severson

OPINION

WILLIS, Judge.

Appellants A1 Herrmann and A1 Herrmann Construction, Inc., challenge the district court’s conclusion that their legal malpractice action is time-barred. We reverse and remand.

FACTS

For purposes of summary judgment, the parties stipulated to the relevant facts. In 1986, respondents are attorneys who assisted appellant A1 Herrmann, the sole owner and employee of appellant A1 Herrmann Construction, Inc. (AHC), in establishing a trust and pension plan, of which Herrmann was sole trustee and eventual beneficiary. The trust became a partner in a partnership named Bridlewilde…