21 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Colorado courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Temple Hoyne Buell Foundation v. Holland & Hartgreen2 sentences1995A legal malpractice claim should be limited to the attorney-client relationship because of the duty that an attorney owes "to his client to employ that degree of knowledge, skill, and judgment ordinarily possessed by members of the legal profession in carrying out the services for his client." Temple Hoyne Buell v. Holland & Hart, 851 P.2d 192, 198 (Colo. App.1992). 1995A legal malpractice claim should be limited to the attorney-client relationship because of the duty that an attorney oWes “to his client to employ that degree of knowledge, skill, and judgment ordinarily possessed by members of the legal profession in carrying out the services for his client.” Temple Hoyne Buell v. Holland & Hart, 851 P.2d 192, 198 (Colo.App.1992). | 2 | 4 |
Stone v. Satrianagreen2 sentences2006See Stone, supra. As a matter of law, to establish a legal malpractice claim, three elements must be proved: (1) the attorney owed a duty of care to the plaintiff; (2) the attorney breached that duty; and (8) the attorney proximately caused damage to the plaintiff. 2005Stone v. Satriana, 41 P.3d 705 (Colo.2002); Brown v. Silvern, 45 P.3d 749 (Colo.App.2001). | 2 | 3 |
Bebo Construction Co. v. Mattox & O'Brien, P.C.green2 sentences2013Bebo Const. Co. v. Mattox & O'Brien, P.C., 990 P.2d 78, 83 (Colo.1999); Bristol Co. v. Osman, 190 P.3d 752, 755 (Colo.App.2007). 2001Bebo Construction Co. v. Mattox & O'Brien, P.C., 990 P.2d 78 (Colo.1999). | 1 | 2 |
BSLNI, Inc. v. Russ T. Diamonds, Inc.green1 sentence2025Diamonds, Inc., 2012 COA 214, ¶ 13 (noting that the standard used to resolve 21 a motion for judgment on the pleadings is consistent with the standard used to resolve a Rule 12(b)(5) motion to dismiss). ¶ 44 To establish a legal malpractice claim based on negligence, a plaintiff must prove that (1) the attorney owed a duty of care to the plaintiff; (2) the attorney breached that duty; (3) the breach caused an injury to the plaintiff; and (4) damages resulted. | 1 | 1 |
Hopp & Flesch, LLC v. Backstreetgreen2 sentences2019See *160 Hopp & Flesch, LLC v. Backstreet , 123 P.3d 1176 , 1183 (Colo. 2005). 2019See , e.g. , Hopp & Flesch, LLC , 123 P.3d at 1183 ; Lombard v. Colo. Outdoor Educ. | 1 | 1 |
Lombard v. Colorado Outdoor Education Center, Inc.green1 sentence2017Ctr., Inc., 266 P.3d 412, 421 (Colo. App. 2011)(“An attorney’s attempt to refer to insurance coverage or a lack thereof at trial is improper.”). 25 ¶ 60 Fourth, a delay between the original injury and a legal malpractice claim is common, which could hurt the client’s opportunity to gather evidence about collectibility. | 1 | 1 |
Schmidt v. Coogangreen1 sentence2017See Schmidt, 335 P.3d at 429 . | 1 | 1 |
First Interstate Bank of Denver, N.A. v. Berenbaumgreen1 sentence2015See First Interstate Bank of Denver v. Berenbaum, 872 P.2d 1297 (Colo.App.1993) ; Temple Hoyne Buell Found. v. Holland & Hart, 851 P.2d 192 (Colo.App.1992). ¶ 37 For example, in Temple Hoyne Buell Foundation, 851 P.2d at 194 , the defendant attorneys had drafted a contract for the plaintiffs that the other contracting party later asserted was unenforceable for violating the rule against perpetuities. | 1 | 1 |
Bristol Co., LP v. Osmangreen1 sentence2013Bebo Const. Co. v. Mattox & O'Brien, P.C., 990 P.2d 78, 83 (Colo.1999); Bristol Co. v. Osman, 190 P.3d 752, 755 (Colo.App.2007). | 1 | 1 |
Purmal v. Robert N. Wadington & Associatesgreen2 sentences2008Howard Corp. v. Skimmer, Wilson, Strickland, Hardy & Benson, 172 Ga.App. 446 , 3283 S.E.2d 664 , 665 (1984); Purmal v. Robert N. Wadington & Assocs., 354 Ill.App.3d 715 , 289 Ill.Dec. 578 , 820 N.E.2d 86, 95 (2004); Bru-nacini v. Kovanagh, 117 N.M. 122 , 869 P.2d 821, 829 (Ct.App.19983); Goggin v. Grimes, 969 S.W.2d 135, 138 (Tex.App.1998). 2008Howard Corp. v. Skimmer, Wilson, Strickland, Hardy & Benson, 172 Ga.App. 446 , 3283 S.E.2d 664 , 665 (1984); Purmal v. Robert N. Wadington & Assocs., 354 Ill.App.3d 715 , 289 Ill.Dec. 578 , 820 N.E.2d 86, 95 (2004); Bru-nacini v. Kovanagh, 117 N.M. 122 , 869 P.2d 821, 829 (Ct.App.19983); Goggin v. Grimes, 969 S.W.2d 135, 138 (Tex.App.1998). | 1 | 1 |
Goggin v. Grimesgreen1 sentence2008Howard Corp. v. Skimmer, Wilson, Strickland, Hardy & Benson, 172 Ga.App. 446 , 3283 S.E.2d 664 , 665 (1984); Purmal v. Robert N. Wadington & Assocs., 354 Ill.App.3d 715 , 289 Ill.Dec. 578 , 820 N.E.2d 86, 95 (2004); Bru-nacini v. Kovanagh, 117 N.M. 122 , 869 P.2d 821, 829 (Ct.App.19983); Goggin v. Grimes, 969 S.W.2d 135, 138 (Tex.App.1998). | 1 | 1 |
Brunacini v. Kavanaghgreen2 sentences2008Howard Corp. v. Skimmer, Wilson, Strickland, Hardy & Benson, 172 Ga.App. 446 , 3283 S.E.2d 664 , 665 (1984); Purmal v. Robert N. Wadington & Assocs., 354 Ill.App.3d 715 , 289 Ill.Dec. 578 , 820 N.E.2d 86, 95 (2004); Bru-nacini v. Kovanagh, 117 N.M. 122 , 869 P.2d 821, 829 (Ct.App.19983); Goggin v. Grimes, 969 S.W.2d 135, 138 (Tex.App.1998). 2008By that time, [the client] should have known, or should have diligently taken steps to discover, the existence of a legal malpractice claim. 111 F.R.D. at 363 ; see also Andrews v. Wade & De Young, Inc., P.C., 875 P.2d 89, 91 (Alaska 1994)("A cause of action for attorney malpractice does not mature [under Alaska Civil Rule 13(a) ] until 'the client discovers or reasonably should have discovered the existence of all the elements of his cause of action.'" (quoting Wettanen v. Cowper, 749 P.2d 362, 364 (Alaska 1988))); Brunacini, 869 P.2d at 826 (a cause of action for legal malpractice is deemed | 1 | 1 |
Andrews v. Wade & De Young, Inc., P.C.green1 sentence2008By that time, [the client] should have known, or should have diligently taken steps to discover, the existence of a legal malpractice claim. 111 F.R.D. at 363 ; see also Andrews v. Wade & De Young, Inc., P.C., 875 P.2d 89, 91 (Alaska 1994)("A cause of action for attorney malpractice does not mature [under Alaska Civil Rule 13(a) ] until 'the client discovers or reasonably should have discovered the existence of all the elements of his cause of action.'" (quoting Wettanen v. Cowper, 749 P.2d 362, 364 (Alaska 1988))); Brunacini, 869 P.2d at 826 (a cause of action for legal malpractice is deemed | 1 | 1 |
Morrison v. Goffgreen1 sentence2008For statute of limitations purposes, a legal malpractice claim accrues "when the client discovers, or through use of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the negligent conduct and damage." Morrison v. Goff, 74 P.3d 409, 411 (Colo.App.2008), aff'd, 91 P.3d 1050 (Colo.2004). | 1 | 1 |
Law Offices of Jerris Leonard v. Mideast Systems, Ltd.green2 sentences2008See Law Offices of Jerris Leonard, P.C. v. Mideast Sys, Ltd., 111 F.R.D. 359, 361 (D.D.C. 1986)("[I]t is hard to imagine a clearer compulsory counterclaim to a complaint for failure to pay legal fees than a legal malpractice claim stemming from the handling of the litigation for which fees are sought."); B.J. 2008By that time, [the client] should have known, or should have diligently taken steps to discover, the existence of a legal malpractice claim. 111 F.R.D. at 363 ; see also Andrews v. Wade & De Young, Inc., P.C., 875 P.2d 89, 91 (Alaska 1994)("A cause of action for attorney malpractice does not mature [under Alaska Civil Rule 13(a) ] until 'the client discovers or reasonably should have discovered the existence of all the elements of his cause of action.'" (quoting Wettanen v. Cowper, 749 P.2d 362, 364 (Alaska 1988))); Brunacini, 869 P.2d at 826 (a cause of action for legal malpractice is deemed | 1 | 1 |
Wettanen v. Cowpergreen1 sentence2008By that time, [the client] should have known, or should have diligently taken steps to discover, the existence of a legal malpractice claim. 111 F.R.D. at 363 ; see also Andrews v. Wade & De Young, Inc., P.C., 875 P.2d 89, 91 (Alaska 1994)("A cause of action for attorney malpractice does not mature [under Alaska Civil Rule 13(a) ] until 'the client discovers or reasonably should have discovered the existence of all the elements of his cause of action.'" (quoting Wettanen v. Cowper, 749 P.2d 362, 364 (Alaska 1988))); Brunacini, 869 P.2d at 826 (a cause of action for legal malpractice is deemed | 1 | 1 |
Shaw v. State, Department of Administration, Public Defender Agencygreen1 sentence2005See, e.g., id. (noting concern that attorneys might produce privileged evidence harmful to defendant’s pursuit of postconviction relief in the course of defending against malpractice suit and "the desirability of allowing a criminal defendant with a valid postconviction relief claim to pursue that remedy without the distraction of also filing a legal malpractice claim”). 4 . | 1 | 1 |
| Morris v. Geergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gibbons v. Ludlow
green
2 sentences2021Gibbons v. Ludlow, 2013 CO 49, ¶ 12 ; Boulders at Escalante LLC v. Otten Johnson Robinson Neff & Ragonetti PC, 2015 COA 85 , ¶ 27. 2015Gibbons v. Ludlow, 2013 CO 49 , ¶ 12, 304 P.3d 239 ; Bebo Constr. | 2 | 2015–2021 |
Roberts v. Holland & Hart
green
2 sentences2013Id. 2008The Essex court also analyzed Roberts v. Holland & Hart, 857 P.2d at 495-96 , in which a division of this court held that the assignment of a legal malpractice claim would undermine the vital relationship between an attorney and client, unduly burden the justice system, and restrict the availability of competent legal services. | 2 | 2008–2013 |
Allen v. Steele
green
1 sentence2019Allen v. Steele , 252 P.3d 476 , 481 (Colo. 2011). ¶19 A legal malpractice claim founded on professional negligence asserts that an attorney breached his or her professional duty of care in a way that proximately injured a client. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Coon v. Ginsberg
green
1 sentence2017Coon held that the plaintiff had to prove that “the amount of that judgment would have been more favorable to [her] than the settlement arranged by [her attorney].” 32 Colo. App. at 210 , 509 P.2d at 1295. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
MEHAFFY, RIDER, WINDHOLZ ETC. v. Cent. Bank
green
2 sentences2011It dismissed their negligent misrepresentation claim because the Steeles did not allege the "special circumstances" that were present in Mehaffy, Rider, Windholz & Wilson v. Central Bank Denver, 892 P.2d 230 (Colo. 1995), in which attorneys prepared opinion letters to induce a third party's participation in a business transaction, at the direction of and for the benefit of the attorneys' client. 2011It dismissed their negligent misrepresentation claim because the Steeles did not allege the "special cireumstances" that were present in Mehaffy, Rider, Windholz & Wilson v. Central Bank Denver, 892 P.2d 230 (Colo.1995), in which attorneys prepared opinion letters to induce a third party's participation in a business transaction, at the direction of and for the benefit of the attorneys' client. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Essex Insurance v. Tyler
green
1 sentence2008Essex, 309 F.Supp.2d at 1273 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
BJ HOWARD CORPORATION v. Skinner, Wilson, Strickland, Hardy & Benson
green
1 sentence2008Howard Corp. v. Skimmer, Wilson, Strickland, Hardy & Benson, 172 Ga.App. 446 , 3283 S.E.2d 664 , 665 (1984); Purmal v. Robert N. Wadington & Assocs., 354 Ill.App.3d 715 , 289 Ill.Dec. 578 , 820 N.E.2d 86, 95 (2004); Bru-nacini v. Kovanagh, 117 N.M. 122 , 869 P.2d 821, 829 (Ct.App.19983); Goggin v. Grimes, 969 S.W.2d 135, 138 (Tex.App.1998). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Morrison v. Goff
green
1 sentence2008For statute of limitations purposes, a legal malpractice claim accrues "when the client discovers, or through use of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the negligent conduct and damage." Morrison v. Goff, 74 P.3d 409, 411 (Colo.App.2008), aff'd, 91 P.3d 1050 (Colo.2004). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Smith v. Truman
green
1 sentence2005This is the situation we encountered in the companion case also decided today, Smith v. Truman, - P.3d -, 2005 WL 452283 (Colo.2005). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Moguls of Aspen, Inc. v. Faegre & Benson
green
1 sentence2005Moguls of Aspen, Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, 956 P.2d 618 (Colo.App.1997). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Brown v. Silvern
green
1 sentence2005Stone v. Satriana, 41 P.3d 705 (Colo.2002); Brown v. Silvern, 45 P.3d 749 (Colo.App.2001). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Waldman v. Levine
green
1 sentence2002Id. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
In Matter of Estate of Scott
green
1 sentence2000See Morris v. Geer, supra ; In re Estate of Scott, supra. Consequently, his contingent claim against the estate arose at that time, and he was required by statute to present it within four months, thereby preserving it while allowing for effective administration of the estate. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| Boatright v. Derr green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.