Legal Opinion · Dissent

LOCAL 1064, RWDSU AFL-CIO v. Ernst & Young

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 25, 1995No. 99445, (Calendar No. 16)Published

1DissentCavanagh, J.

The issue here is whether an accountant may assert the malpractice *334period of limitation as an affirmative defense to liability. The majority holds that if someone, somehow, sometime, somewhere, and in some source, labeled an action against a member of the same occupation as defendant a "malpractice” claim, then the two-year malpractice period of limitation will apply. Statutes of limitation are premised on the idea that there should be a bright-line cut-off date to potential litigation. I dissent because I believe that the majority’s holding unnecessarily confuses and obscures the rules of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Sam v. BalardoMichigan Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Kambas v. St. Joseph's Mercy Hosp. of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Dennis v. Robbins Funeral HomeMichigan Supreme Court · 1987
  4. City of Marysville v. Pate, Hirn & Bogue, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 1986
  5. LOCAL 1064, RWDSU AFL-CIO v. Ernst & YoungMichigan Court of Appeals · 1994

1 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