Karno

Karno v. Biddle

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 636·36 Cal. App. 4th 622·42 Cal. Rptr. 2d 318·95 Daily Journal DAR 9078·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5344
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 7, 1995A067035California2,453 words

Opinion

Opinion

Haning, J.

Plaintiffs/appellants Norton Kamo et al. appeal the dismissal of their legal malpractice action against defendants/respondents W. Craig Biddle et al. after respondents’ demurrer was sustained without leave to amend on statute of limitations grounds. (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.6, subd. (a)(1), (2).) Appellants contend the trial court erred regarding the commencement of the limitation period.

Facts and Procedural History

Since this appeal is taken from an order of dismissal after a demurrer to appellants’ second amended complaint was sustained without leave to amend, we must accept all material facts properly pleaded as true, and accept those subject to judicial notice (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318 [ 216 Cal.Rptr. 718 , 703 P.2d 58 ]), and we report them accordingly.

Appellants are the owners of the Southlake and Niles mobilehome parks located in Fremont. In approximately August 1988 the United States Congress approved an amendment to the federal Fair Housing Act (the amendment) prohibiting discrimination against families with children in all housing, including mobilehome parks. The amendment provided an exception whereby families with children could be…

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.