Legal Opinion
Antone v. Mirviss
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided August 17, 2006No. A04-1367PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ANDERSON, PAUL H., Justice.
Richard Antone brought this legal malpractice action against his attorney, Israel Mirviss, alleging that Mirviss was negligent when he drafted an antenuptial agreement. Antone asserted that Mirviss failed to draft an agreement that protected *333his interest in any marital appreciation to his premarital property. The Hennepin County District Court dismissed Antone’s complaint under the six-year statute of limitations for legal malpractice actions, concluding that Antone’s cause of action accrued either when he signed the agreement and was married or when the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Zimmie v. Calfee, Halter & GriswoldOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- WILCOX v. the Executors of PlummerSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
- Jordache Enterprises, Inc. v. BrobeckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- Dalton v. Dow Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
- Mumford v. Staton, Whaley & PriceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- TCF National Bank v. Market Intelligence, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2016
- Sanchez v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
- Day Masonry v. Independent School District 347Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- MacRae v. Group Health Plan, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2008
- In re Petters Co.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 2013
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.