Legal Opinion

Cline v. Watkins

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 21, 1977No. Civ. 49009PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

THOMPSON, J.

In the matter at bench, we are called upon to determine whether the substitution of new counsel who negligently fails to cure the results of negligence of prior counsel in representation of his client in pending litigation relieves the first attorney of liability. Concluding that the issue must be decided on the basis of the reasonable foreseeability of the second lawyer’s failure and that foreseeability in this context is a question of fact, we reverse a judgment entered in favor of the first lawyer on his general demurrer.

Plaintiff filed her first amended complaint naming…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In Re Marriage of BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Smith v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Fish v. Los Angeles Dodgers Baseball ClubCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  4. Starr v. MooslinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Daugert v. PappasWashington Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Carson Harbor Village, Ltd. v. Unocal Corp.District Court, C.D. California · 2003
  3. Williams v. WraxallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  4. Purdy v. Pacific Automobile InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  5. Pappert v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co.California Court of Appeal · 1982

15 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