Legal Opinion

Lehman v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 28, 2006No. B193165PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MALLANO, Acting P. J.

This original proceeding raises the question of whether the statute of limitations for a liability “created by law” (Code Civ. Proc., § 359 (section 359)) applies to a claim alleging a breach of fiduciary duty by the directors of a corporation.

We conclude that section 359 governs a fiduciary duty claim where the basis of the directors’ liability was first authorized by a statute or the Constitution. If the basis of liability existed at common law, it was not “created by law” within the meaning of section 359, even if the common law theory of liability has since…

2Cases cited46 opinions

  1. Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Ross v. BernhardSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Jones v. H. F. Ahmanson & Co.California Supreme Court · 1969
  4. Frances T. v. Village Green Owners Assn.California Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Russell M. Smith v. John J. Cremins, Jr., John F. Mahon, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. BoyleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  2. Valencia v. SmythCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  3. Zamora v. LehmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  4. Brandenburg v. EUREKA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCYCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  5. Aceituno v. VowellDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2014

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