Get Beyond the Pleadings, 4/3 DCA Says.
Lee v. Hanley, Case No. G048501 (4th Dist., Div. 3 July 15, 2014) (published), authored on behalf of a 3-0 panel by Justice Moore, basically found that the one-year statute of limitations in CCP § 340.6 did not necessarily apply to a situation where an attorney was alleged to have failed in returning unused attorney’s fees to an ex-client when the case was concluded. Was this action in the performance of legal services or was this more akin to extraordinary “stealing” (conversion) actions? Well, the future performance of services made this a situation where the pleadings alone could not determine whether the action was time-barred, so the lower court’s dismissal at the pleading stage—based on the SOL—was reversed in this one.
Low resolution jpg not suitable for commercial reproduction, available from Wikipedia.