In an opinion that reminds matrimonial lawyers that there is no telling how long after a final judgment they can remain liable for malpractice, a New Jersey appeals court has ruled that a wife who agreed to an alimony settlement in 1994 could sue for malpractice almost 10 years later. Reinstating the claim, the panel said the cause of action did not accrue when the client had a premonition that something went wrong. It accrued when another lawyer told the client she might have a malpractice case.
August 16, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
The six-year statute of limitations on legal malpractice can be a fuzzy concept in matrimonial cases, and a New Jersey appeals court showed why on Tuesday.
A three-judge panel ruled that a wife who agreed to an alimony settlement in 1994 could sue for malpractice almost 10 years later because she did not know she had a case against her lawyer until another attorney told her so.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
