Pennsylvania legal malpractice law is continually evolving, but some parts of the law are well fixed and case law continually serves to affirm it. Some recent cases from our state appellate courts reinforce some of the most basic black letter elements of legal malpractice law.
Discovery Rule
In an unpublished decision, our Superior Court recently reaffirmed that legal malpractice actions in Pennsylvania are governed by the occurrence rule. In Namani v. Bezark, Lerner, & DeVirgilis, 2017 Pa. Super. Unpub. Lexis 35 (Pa. Super. 2017), the court reaffirmed that the “trigger for the accrual of a legal malpractice action, for statute of limitations purposes, is not the realization of actual loss, but the occurrence of a breach of duty.” The court affirmed the decision of the trial court granting summary judgment on the basis of the statute of limitations.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
