Legal Opinion

Alter v. Michael

California Supreme Court

Decided April 25, 1966No. L. A. 28813PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BURKE, J.—

On July 24, 1963, plaintiffs filed a malpractice action against defendant attorney at law, alleging that during the period of October 1961 through April 1962 defendant had acted negligently in the conduct of certain legal matters which plaintiffs had retained him to handle. The trial court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss, based on the affirmative defense of the one-year statute of limitations found in subdivision 3 of section 340 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1 and set up in defendant’s answer. Plaintiffs appeal from the ensuing judgment. As will appear, we have determined…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Cole v. RushCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Huysman v. KirschCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Kusior v. SilverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Stafford v. ShultzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Weinstock v. EisslerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Neel v. Magana, Olney, Levy, Cathcart & GelfandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Budd v. NixenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co.California Court of Appeal · 1981
  4. Bishop v. City of San JoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Heyer v. FlaigCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969

25 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