In this column on attorney liabilities, this author has oft discussed the legal malpractice statute of limitations as in flux. In light of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s recent holding in Dittman, the legal malpractice statute of limitations in light of the economic loss/gist of the action doctrine(s) (the doctrine) must be revisited.

In Coleman v. Duane Morris, 58 A.3d 833 (Pa. Super. 2012), the Superior Court held that legal malpractice gives rise to two causes: legal malpractice negligence; and legal malpractice breach of contract.