Vahle

Vahle v. Barwick

Good Law
113 Cal. Rptr. 2d 793·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 2571·2001 Daily Journal DAR 12395·93 Cal. App. 4th 1323·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9943
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 27, 2001A093671California3,263 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kay, J.

Plaintiffs Richa and Louis Vahle allege their former attorney, defendant Jill E. Barwick, committed malpractice when she represented them in a personal injury lawsuit. The trial court held a release agreement between the Vahles and the defendant in the personal injury lawsuit barred any action for malpractice against Barwick. Though Barwick was not a party to the release agreement, the trial court found language in the agreement purporting to release all other persons, firms or corporations was unambiguous and benefited Barwick. The trial court granted Barwick’s motion for summary judgment.

We conclude that whether the parties to the release agreement intended to release Barwick is a triable issue of fact. We reverse the judgment.

Background

The Vahles sued Silverado Country Club and Resort (Silverado) for damages allegedly resulting from a slip and fall by Richa Vahle on Silverado’s property. Barwick represented the Vahles. Silverado prevailed at trial and the court ordered the Vahles to pay over $60,000 in costs and attorney fees to Silverado.

The Vahles appealed from the judgment against them in the personal injury lawsuit. While Barwick pursued the appeal, 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.