Scarzella

Scarzella v. Demers

Good Law
17 Cal. App. 4th 1762·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 867·22 Cal. Rptr. 2d 329·93 Daily Journal DAR 10895·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6332
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 24, 1993C012818California3,037 words

Opinion

Opinion

Blease, J.

This is an appeal from a discretionary dismissal of an attorney malpractice action under Code of Civil Procedure sections 583.410 and 583.420, subdivision (a)(1), for failure to make service of summons on the defendant within two years after the action was commenced. Plaintiff Jack Scarzella contends that the trial court abused its discretion in granting the motion for dismissal because the delay in service of summons was excused by the pendency of an appeal in the underlying wrongful termination action which is the subject of the malpractice claim. We will conclude that the mere pendency of such an appeal does not excuse a delay in the service of summons. We will affirm the judgment (order of dismissal).

Facts and Procedural Background

Defendant Louis DeMers represented Scarzella in a wrongful termination of employment action in the Sacramento Superior Court. Scarzella prevailed, recovering a substantial judgment for compensatory and punitive damages against the corporation which was his former employer and, on a theory of wrongful interference with the contractual employment relationship, against the major stockholder of the corporation.

Both sides appealed;…

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.