Greenbaum

Village Nurseries v. Greenbaum

Good Law
101 Cal. App. 4th 26·123 Cal. Rptr. 2d 555·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4495·2002 Daily Journal DAR 9167·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7346
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 9, 2002No. G028121California7,086 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Fybel, J.

In this legal malpractice action, plaintiff Village Nurseries, L.P., appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of defendants *31 Martin B. Greenbaum, Dennis Ferentz, Greenbaum & Ferentz (collectively the Greenbaum defendants), Raymond King, and The Coulombe Law Firm. The trial court granted the Greenbaum defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff’s claims were barred by the judgmental immunity doctrine. In order to establish judgmental immunity, a defendant must prove (1) the law was unsettled at the time professional advice was rendered, and (2) the advice was based upon the exercise of informed judgment. Because neither the Greenbaum defendants nor The Coulombe Law Firm showed they exercised informed judgment when they rendered professional advice to Village Nurseries, they failed to establish the second prong of the judgmental immunity test and were not entitled to summary judgment on that basis.

The Greenbaum defendants and The Coulombe Law Firm moved for summary judgment on the ground the statute of limitations barred Village Nurseries’ claims, but the trial court denied those motions. We conclude Village Nurseries’ claims against…

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.