Lockton v. O’Rourke (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1051 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four) [published]. A sophisticated businessman hired GMSR’s clients to bring suit against various individuals and entities that he claimed had fraudulently settled litigation arising out of his ouster from a company that he founded. He hired a separate attorney to file a separate lawsuit against a law firm that allegedly had defamed him in the underlying litigation. The separate suit was dismissed as time-barred. He then sued GMSR’s clients, alleging they committed malpractice by failing to timely add the law firm defendant to the separate suit they were handling. The trial court found the action barred by the one-year statute of limitations for legal malpractice actions. On appeal, GMSR successfully argued that “continuous representation” tolling did not apply even though GMSR’s clients had continued to represent the plaintiff within the one-year limitation period in the action they were handling. The appellate court agreed, affirming the judgment in favor of GMSR’s clients.
© 2025 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
6420 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, California 90048
p: (310) 859 7811 | f: (310) 276 5261
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
p: (415) 315 1774
© 2025 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
We welcome your inquiry. However, sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. For that reason, you should not send us any kind of confidential information. Until we have agreed to represent you, we cannot be obligated to keep it confidential.