Slack

Slack v. Marx CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 7, 2021G059600California1,769 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 12/7/21 Slack v. Marx CA4/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

ELIZABETH ANNE SLACK, as Executor, etc.

G059600

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 30-2018-01007078) v.

OPINION

PAUL MARX et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

Appeal from judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Richard Y. Lee, Judge. Affirmed. Makarem & Associates, Ronald W. Makarem and Jared V. Walder for Plaintiff and Appellant. Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck, Andrew J. Waxler and Courtney E. Curtis- Ives for Defendants and Respondents. Plaintiff Elizabeth Anne Slack, as Executor of the Estate of Charles B. Slack, appeals from summary judgment entered against her based on the statute of limitations in a legal malpractice action against the former lawyers of her late husband Charles Slack. Plaintiff…

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.