Former Archer & Greiner attorney Richard Grungo Jr. Courtesy photo
A three-judge Appellate Division panel said the Haddonfield firm and onetime partner Richard Grungo Jr. could not be held liable because Pennsylvania's two-year statute of limitations should apply rather than New Jersey's six-year statute of limitations.
June 29, 2018 at 02:34 PM
1 minute read
bureau chief
In a case requiring the court to tackle New Jersey’s and Pennsylvania’s divergent statutes of limitation on legal malpractice claims, a state appeals panel has handed Archer & Greiner a win.
A three-judge Appellate Division panel on June 29 said the Haddonfield firm and onetime partner Richard Grungo Jr. could not be held liable because Pennsylvania’s two-year statute of limitations should apply rather than New Jersey’s six-year statute of limitations.
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
