From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hays v. Ewing

Supreme Court of California
Jul 12, 1886
70 Cal. 127 (Cal. 1886)

Opinion

         Department One

         Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Modoc County.

         COUNSEL:

         E. V. Spencer, for Appellant.

          Matt. F. Johnson, C. L. Claflin, and F. W. Ewing, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: McKinstry, J. Myrick, J., and Ross, J., concurred.

         OPINION

          McKINSTRY, Judge

         This action is against an attorney at law for neglect of duty in the management of a certain action brought by the present plaintiff against Cogswell et al. The defendant demurred generally, and also on the special ground that the complaint shows that the statutory limitation has run against the alleged cause of action.

         The judgment for defendant in Hayes v. Cogswell was made November 19, 1881. This action was commenced June 16, 1884, and so far as it is based on any neglect of the defendant prior to the judgment of November, 1881, was barred by section 339 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

         The complaint herein avers that the plaintiff, subsequent to and within one year after the judgment in Hayes v. Cogswell, demanded of the defendant herein that he should take an appeal on behalf of the plaintiff in that action.

         But the facts stated in this complaint show that an appeal would have been of no avail.

         Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Hays v. Ewing

Supreme Court of California
Jul 12, 1886
70 Cal. 127 (Cal. 1886)
Case details for

Hays v. Ewing

Case Details

Full title:P. W. HAYS, Appellant, v. F. W. EWING, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jul 12, 1886

Citations

70 Cal. 127 (Cal. 1886)
11 P. 602

Citing Cases

Alter v. Michael

Section 340, Code of Civil Procedure provides: Without exception, from 1886 (Hays v. Ewing, 70 Cal. 127, 11 …

Laird v. Blacker

" Although section 339, subdivision 1, did not establish an accrual date for legal malpractice actions,…