Legal Opinion
Shiver, McGrane & Martin v. Littell
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 2, 1990No. A038935PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KLINE, P. J.
Appellants Robert L. and Joyce Littell appeal from a judgment holding they did not timely commence an action within the meaning of Business and Professions Code section 6204, subdivision (c) which would have precluded confirmation of an arbitration award entered against them. Appellants assert (1) the timely filing of a legal malpractice action satisfied the requirement under the Business and Professions Code that they commence “an action” to seek a trial de novo on the issues involved in the arbitration; (2) if the malpractice action did not fulfill this requirement, the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hollister Convalescent Hospital, Inc. v. RicoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Pressler v. Donald L. Bren Co.California Supreme Court · 1982
- Glassco v. El Sereno Country Club, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1932
- Kane, Kane & Kritzer, Inc. v. AltagenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- Eskaton Monterey Hospital v. MyersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Maynard v. BrandonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
- Shaw v. Hughes Aircraft Co.California Court of Appeal · 2000
- Baker v. CastaldiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Giorgianni v. CrowleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Glaser, Weil, Fink, Jacobs & Shapiro, LLP v. GoffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.