Legal Opinion
Marshall v. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 24, 1995No. B086555PublishedCited by 58 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
LILLIE, P. J.
In this action for legal malpractice, plaintiff Marshall appeals from judgment of dismissal entered after the court sustained without leave to amend the demurrer to complaint of defendants Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Ronald E. Gother, Anne K. Hilker, and David H. Kennedy on the ground that the action was barred by the statute of limitations.
Allegations of the Complaint and Procedural Background
On December 3, 1993, plaintiff filed complaint for damages for legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty arising out of defendants’ provision of legal services to plaintiff in…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Laird v. BlackerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Mangini v. Aerojet-General Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1991
- United States National Bank of Oregon v. DaviesOregon Supreme Court · 1976
- International Engine Parts, Inc. v. Feddersen & Co.California Supreme Court · 1995
- ITT Small Business Finance Corp. v. NilesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- Smith v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- City of Atascadero v. Merill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1999
- Lazar v. Hertz Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1999
- Morris v. Redwood Empire BancorpCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Lockley v. Law Office of Cantrell, Green, Pekich, Cruz & McCortCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.