Aronow

Aronow v. LaCroix

Good Law
1990 Cal. App. LEXIS 408·219 Cal. App. 3d 1039·268 Cal. Rptr. 866
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 24, 1990A025056California5,741 words

Opinion

Opinion

Holmdahl, J.

The trial court found for plaintiff in a malicious prosecution trial, and awarded damages and costs. Defendants appeal the judgment.

The judgment is reversed and the trial court is directed to enter judgment for appellants.

Facts

LaCroix and Schumb became associated in the practice of law in 1964. In June, 1966, Schumb referred Roscoe Bailey to LaCroix in connection with a possible claim by Bailey against Joseph Fitzsimmons, M.D. (Dr. Joseph), Ann Fitzsimmons, M.D. (Dr. Ann), and Jerome Lackner, M.D., for medical malpractice. On June 29, 1967, LaCroix filed a medical malpractice suit on behalf of Roscoe Bailey against Dr. Joseph, Dr. Ann, and Lackner. Trial of that suit proceeded in two phases, first on the statute of limitations defense and second on the merits. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 597; Aerojet General Corp. v. Superior Court (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 950, 952 [ 223 Cal.Rptr. 249 ].) Lackner prevailed on his statute of limitations defense as a result of a verdict returned on February 3, 1970. Betty Aronow, who had up to that time been a spectator at the trial, substituted in as Dr. Ann’s attorney of record for the second phase of trial, but the second phase of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.