Paul

Paul v. Drost

Bad Law
186 Cal. App. 3d 1407·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 2172·231 Cal. Rptr. 361
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 7, 1986No. B016575California1,667 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hofstetter, J.

Billy Paul, Jr. (Paul or appellant), filed a complaint on September 24, 1981, for legal malpractice against Donald James Drost *1409 (Drost or respondent) and others. Summons and complaint were not served on Drost until June 6, 1985. On July 5, 1985, Drost appeared specially in the action and moved to quash service and dismiss the action. Paul opposed the motion. On August 29, 1985, the motion was granted and the case dismissed.

Background

On August 31, 1978, appellant Paul filed a complaint in the superior court as a result of injuries sustained from a dog bite on September 2, 1977. His attorney at that time, James H. Goodwin, died, and Paul signed a substitution of attorney form August 14,1979, naming Drost as his attorney. In July or August of 1980, Drost was substituted out of that case. Thereafter, Paul filed a medical malpractice action through his new attorney. That action was ultimately consolidated with the dog bite case, and was settled 1 at a mandatory settlement conference on January 17, 1984, and ultimately dismissed April 10, 1984.

In the legal malpractice action against Drost, Paul alleges that Drost was negligent in not filing a complaint in a timely…

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.