What Is the Statute of Limitations on Legal Malpractice

The Court of Appeal held that a cause of legal error arises against the lawyer when the limitation period for the underlying action for which the lawyer was engaged expires. See Shumsky v. Eisenstein, op. cit. In Burgess v. Long Island Railroad Authority, 79 NY2d 777 [1991], the Court of Appeal held: Consider the following scenario: A client consults a lawyer for advice in a situation where that client was previously represented by another lawyer in a legal matter. The new lawyer reviews the client`s file obtained from a former lawyer and determines what he or she considers to be misconduct or breach of fiduciary duty by a former lawyer of the client, so that this may affect the outcome of the client`s case in the dispute. This case is important because it clarifies that lawsuits in California do not need to resolve the underlying case to determine whether a plaintiff has suffered actual harm. The loss or reduction of a right or remedy is sufficient to constitute actual harm. Thus, if a plaintiff for an error of law has suffered a loss or diminution of a right or remedy, the limitation period is not extended to await the outcome of the underlying action. It is true that article 340.6340.6 (a) (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the one-year limitation period is extended until the plaintiff “has suffered actual injury”. However, the next question to ask is: “What constitutes an actual injury?” And there`s the catch.

After the judge dismissed the aggrieved employee`s claim, so that he had no recourse for pecuniary damages for his injuries, the law firm exposed itself to the action brought against him for error of law by allegedly “blowing up” the limitation period by not bringing the action against LIRR in a timely manner. The limitation period for an action for error of law is as follows: negligence – two years; and breach of contract – four years. “But wait!” she said. “My client was not injured before the end of the trial. Is the limitation period not time-barred until he has lost the case or suffered actual harm, as provided for in Article 340.6(a)(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure? Legal errors can occur in real estate transactions, personal injury and family law matters. In general, however, one of the reasons for your lawyer to claim damages in the event of a legal error is this: the new lawyer believes that there is a chance that he will prevail in the client`s case and assumes that he will do his best to “fix” the problem. If it is unable to do so and the client loses in court, it sends the client to a lawyer for legal errors in order to bring an action against the previous lawyer. Theoretically, the application of the limitation period to a court case is relatively simple. If a lawsuit is not filed within two years, it cannot be filed at all. Of course, in practice, the determination of the respective legal deadline can be much more complicated.

This raises an important question: When does the statute of limitations start running in a Florida legal error case? The short answer is that the limitation period begins from the moment the action occurs. Whether the limitation period has expired is complicated. In many cases, it may seem too late to sue a lawyer, but there may still be time to file a complaint. It is very important to consult a lawyer who has experience with legal errors to determine whether or not the limitation period has expired. Best Practice and Warning: A client should NOT wait to file a malpractice lawsuit or consult with an independent lawyer about the possibility of a lawyer`s previous negligence. If a subsequent lawyer fails to address the potential issue to his client, the next lawyer could be held liable for the negligence of the previous lawyer. For example, under the doctrine of “continuous representation,” if the lawyer continues to represent the client in the same case after the first error of law, the limitation period does not begin until the lawyer ceases to represent the client in that case. We have successfully invoked this doctrine on behalf of our clients in a number of cases. License our cutting-edge legal content to strengthen your thought leadership and brand. An error of law is a very difficult type of litigation for a reason: assuming that the lawyer “screwed up” as much as possible, did everything as badly as possible, or did nothing right, it may still not matter – the ultimate question of liability for legal errors will be, if the underlying case for which the lawyer was hired had any value.