Legal Opinion

Burnap v. Linnartz

Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)

Decided October 6, 1995No. 04-94-00303-CVPublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STONE, Justice.

This is an appeal from a summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant lawyers in a legal malpractice action. The appellant, Willard Burnap, contends numerous unresolved fact issues preclude summary judgment. We agree that material issues of fact remain regarding the existence of an attorney-client relationship, and that these issues must be submitted to a jury. We find, however, that Burnap’s claims against appel-lees William Rork and McCamish & Martin, P.C. are barred by the statute of limitations. We therefore affirm in part and reverse and remand in part.

STANDARD…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Nixon v. Mr. Property Management Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Montgomery v. KennedyTexas Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Moreno v. Sterling Drug, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Rogers v. Ricane Enterprises, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Willis v. MaverickTexas Supreme Court · 1988

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

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. Apex Towing Co. v. TolinTexas Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Rodriguez v. Tinsman & Houser, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1999
  3. In the Interest of M.M.O.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1998
  4. Savage v. Psychiatric Institute of Bedford, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1998
  5. Querner v. Rindfuss, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1998

43 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