Legal Opinion
Panattoni v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 16, 1988No. C004116PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BLEASE, Acting P. J.
Petitioners Leonard C. Panattoni and Panattoni, Westley, Farrell & Fraulob (defendants) seek relief from the denial of their motion for summary judgment. Defendants assert that the legal malpractice action filed against them by real party in interest Cesario Palacio (plaintiff) and his wife, Nellie Palacio, is barred by the statute of limitations of Code of Civil Procedure section 340.6. We agree, and shall issue a writ of mandate directing the superior court to enter judgment in defendants’ favor.
Discussion
I
A defendant’s motion for summary judgment addresses the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Baright v. WillisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Pultz v. HolgersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- Mizrahi v. MiscioneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
3Cited by9 opinions
- Miller v. Lakeside Village Condominium Assn.California Court of Appeal · 1991
- Centinela Hospital Assn. v. City of InglewoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Truong v. GlasserCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Anderson v. Heart Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- Los Angeles Equestrian Center, Inc. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.