CRANE v. EVANSTON INSURANCE COMPANY (2020)

Writ denied.

As I explained in my dissent in Reeder v. North, 97-0239 (La. 10/21/97), 701 So. 2d 1291 (Johnson, J. dissenting):

If a client is required to file suit against his attorney while the suit is being litigated and before a judgment is definitive, the client is placed in the untenable position of asserting that a judgment is both valid and invalid. To follow the reasoning of the majority would lead to absurd results. An attorney need only litigate a claim past the three (3) year preemptive period to avoid all consequences of his malpractice.

I would find that plaintiff's cause of action did not ripen into a legal malpractice claim until the court of appeal affirmed the dismissal of his lawsuit as untimely.

I would grant and docket this matter to further consider the ruling of Reeder v. North, 97-0239 (La. 10/21/97), 701 So.2d 1291, which held that the continuous representation rule does not apply to peremptive periods.

Johnson, C.J., would grant and assigns reasons. Hughes, J., would grant. Crain, J., would grant and assigns reasons.