Legal Opinion
Furia v. Helm
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 10, 2003No. A100102PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
POLLAK, J.
Plaintiff David Furia, doing business as Furia Construction Company, 1 appeal's from an adverse judgment entered after the court sustained without leave to amend the demurrer of defendant Hugh N. Helm III to Furia’s second amended complaint. The amended complaint alleged causes of action for legal malpractice and fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment, arising out of an agreement by Helm, an attorney representing Furia’s construction clients, to attempt to mediate differences between Furia and his clients. Although we have some misgivings about the manner in which Helm…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Bernhard v. Bank of America National Trust & Saving AssociationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Committee on Children's Television, Inc. v. General Foods Corp.California Supreme Court · 1983
- Flatt v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Jackson v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- Fox v. PollackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Mainor v. NaultNevada Supreme Court · 2004
- Citizens for a Sustainable Treasure Island v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- NOLM, LLC v. County of ClarkNevada Supreme Court · 2004
- ABF Capital Corp. v. BerglassCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- The Swahn Group, Inc. v. SegalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.