Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 California opinions name it 3 courts 1998–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California 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 |
|---|---|---|
Jordache Enterprises, Inc. v. Brobeckgreen2 sentences2017(Id. at p. 937.) 8 In fact, Jordache expressly overruled an earlier Supreme Court decision—also involving legal malpractice—that Feddersen relied on by analogy in identifying when a client suffers “actual injury” in the context of an accountant’s negligent preparation of income tax returns. ( Jordache, supra, 18 Cal.4th at pp. 762-763 [explaining that the “broad, categorical rule” for accrual of an attorney malpractice cause of action articulated in ITT Small Business Finance Corp. v. Niles (1994) 9 Cal.4th 245 “cannot be reconciled with the particularized factual inquiry required to determine 2017(Id. at p. 937.) 8 In fact, Jordache expressly overruled an earlier Supreme Court decision—also involving legal malpractice—that Feddersen relied on by analogy in identifying when a client suffers “actual injury” in the context of an accountant’s negligent preparation of income tax returns. ( Jordache, supra, 18 Cal.4th at pp. 762-763 [explaining that the “broad, categorical rule” for accrual of an attorney malpractice cause of action articulated in ITT Small Business Finance Corp. v. Niles (1994) 9 Cal.4th 245 “cannot be reconciled with the particularized factual inquiry required to determine | 3 | 4 |
Adams v. Paulgreen2 sentences1998It is at this point that the former client has discovered the fact of damage and suffered `actual injury' due to the malpractice under section 340.6." ( ITT, supra, 9 Cal.4th at p. 258, 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 552 , 885 P.2d 965 , original italics.) In ITT and again in Adams , this court described ITT as presenting a narrow holding restricted to the circumstances of that case. ( ITT, supra, 9 Cal.4th at p. 258, 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 552 , 885 P.2d 965 ; Adams, supra, 11 Cal.4th at p. 588 , 46 Cal.Rptr.2d 594 , 904 P.2d 1205 (lead opn. of Arabian, J.).) We are now convinced, however, that the rules ITT advance 1998It is at this point that the former client has discovered the fact of damage and suffered `actual injury' due to the malpractice under section 340.6." ( ITT, supra, 9 Cal.4th at p. 258, 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 552 , 885 P.2d 965 , original italics.) In ITT and again in Adams , this court described ITT as presenting a narrow holding restricted to the circumstances of that case. ( ITT, supra, 9 Cal.4th at p. 258, 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 552 , 885 P.2d 965 ; Adams, supra, 11 Cal.4th at p. 588 , 46 Cal.Rptr.2d 594 , 904 P.2d 1205 (lead opn. of Arabian, J.).) We are now convinced, however, that the rules ITT advance | 2 | 2 |
ITT Small Business Finance Corp. v. Nilesgreen2 sentences2017Niles (1994) 9 Cal.4th 245 , 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 552 , 885 P.2d 965 "cannot be reconciled with the particularized factual inquiry required to determine actual injury under" the limitations statute for legal malpractice actions].) In Feddersen , the court examined the evolution of the "discovery plus actual injury" ( Feddersen , supra , 9 Cal.4th at p. 615, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 150 , 888 P.2d 1279 ) requirement in professional malpractice actions and relied in substantial part on ITT , explaining that "the assessment of the tax deficiency is the equivalent of the settlement [of underlying litigation] in I 2017Niles (1994) 9 Cal.4th 245 , 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 552 , 885 P.2d 965 "cannot be reconciled with the particularized factual inquiry required to determine actual injury under" the limitations statute for legal malpractice actions].) In Feddersen , the court examined the evolution of the "discovery plus actual injury" ( Feddersen , supra , 9 Cal.4th at p. 615, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 150 , 888 P.2d 1279 ) requirement in professional malpractice actions and relied in substantial part on ITT , explaining that "the assessment of the tax deficiency is the equivalent of the settlement [of underlying litigation] in I | 1 | 4 |
International Engine Parts, Inc. v. Feddersen & Co.green2 sentences2017Niles (1994) 9 Cal.4th 245 , 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 552 , 885 P.2d 965 "cannot be reconciled with the particularized factual inquiry required to determine actual injury under" the limitations statute for legal malpractice actions].) In Feddersen , the court examined the evolution of the "discovery plus actual injury" ( Feddersen , supra , 9 Cal.4th at p. 615, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 150 , 888 P.2d 1279 ) requirement in professional malpractice actions and relied in substantial part on ITT , explaining that "the assessment of the tax deficiency is the equivalent of the settlement [of underlying litigation] in I 2017Niles (1994) 9 Cal.4th 245 , 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 552 , 885 P.2d 965 "cannot be reconciled with the particularized factual inquiry required to determine actual injury under" the limitations statute for legal malpractice actions].) In Feddersen , the court examined the evolution of the "discovery plus actual injury" ( Feddersen , supra , 9 Cal.4th at p. 615, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 150 , 888 P.2d 1279 ) requirement in professional malpractice actions and relied in substantial part on ITT , explaining that "the assessment of the tax deficiency is the equivalent of the settlement [of underlying litigation] in I | 1 | 3 |
Gaumnitz v. Indemnity Insurance of North Americagreen2 sentences1999Co. (1934) 2 Cal.App.2d 134, 138 [ 37 P.2d 712 ].) 7 This particularized factual inquiry appears to have been the approach adopted by the trial court. 1999Co. (1934) 2 Cal.App.2d 134, 138 [ 37 P.2d 712 ].) 7 This particularized factual inquiry appears to have been the approach adopted by the trial court. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Budd v. Nixen
red
2 sentences1998The Legislature, by codifying the rule established in Budd, supra, 6 Cal.3d 195 , 98 Cal.Rptr. 849 , 491 P.2d 433 , did not toll the limitations period to await preordained configurations of injury. 1998The Legislature, by codifying the rule established in Budd, supra, 6 Cal.3d 195 , 98 Cal.Rptr. 849 , 491 P.2d 433 , did not toll the limitations period to await preordained configurations of injury. | 2 | 1998–1998 |
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.