Skip to main content

California Court of Appeal


Rose v. Hudson, C052537

In legal malpractice case against plaintiff's former criminal defense lawyer, sustaining of demurrer on the ground the complaint was time-barred by Code of Civil Procedure section 340.6 is affirmed over claim that the rule in Coscia v. McKenna & Cueno (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1194 should not have been applied to plaintiff retroactively, and he should be allowed a reasonable time to satisfy the limitations period.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 07/24/2007
  • Published 07/24/2007

Judges

  • SIMS, Acting P.J.

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  • Law Office of Mark E. Merin, Mark E. Merin and Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild, Sacramento;  Law Office of Fred J. Hiestand and Fred J. Hiestand, Sacramento, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

  • For Appellees:
  • Hansen, Culhane, Kohls, Jones & Sommer and Kevin R. Culhane, Sacramento, for Defendant and Respondent.
Copied to clipboard