Diaz v. Piquette
| Decision Date | 28 October 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 86-51,86-51 |
| Citation | 496 So.2d 239,11 Fla. L. Weekly 2276 |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2276 Bismark DIAZ and Bis D. Corp., Appellants, v. William J. PIQUETTE, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Taylor, Brion, Buker & Greene and Arnaldo Velez, Miami, for appellants.
Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Strickroot and John R. Kelso, Miami, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUBBART and JORGENSON, JJ.
We reverse the summary judgment entered below on limitations grounds upon the determination that the period for commencing an action on appellants' claim for alleged legal malpractice resulting in the loss of their case at trial did not begin to run until the adverse judgment was affirmed on appeal. 1 In so ruling, we follow the square recent holding in Richards Enterprises v. Swofford, 495 So.2d 1210 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); strong indications in other Florida decisions that this is the rule, see Chapman v. Garcia, 463 So.2d 528 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Birnholz v. Blake, 399 So.2d 375 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); and the better reasoned authority in other jurisdictions. Bowman v. Abramson, 545 F.Supp. 227 (E.D.Pa.1982); Amfac Distribution Corp. v. Miller, 138 Ariz. 152, 673 P.2d 792 (1983); see also Northwestern Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Osborne, 573 F.Supp. 1045 (E.D.Ky.1983). Most important, since it is plain that no claim would even have existed if the temporary results of the attorney's conduct had been reversed on appeal, this decision is in accordance with the salutary concomitant principles that premature, possibly useless, litigation should be discouraged and that no cause of action should therefore be deemed to have accrued until the existence of redressable harm has been established. Birnholz v. Blake, 399 So.2d 375; Moore v. Morris, 429 So.2d 1209 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (Schwartz, C.J., dissenting), rev'd, 475 So.2d 666 (Fla.1985).
Since, under this holding, the instant action was timely commenced, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for further consistent proceedings.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Grunwald v. Bronkesh
...545 F.Supp. 227, 231 (E.D.Pa.1982) (interpreting Pennsylvania law); Haghayegh v. Clark, 520 So.2d 58, 59 (Fla.App.1988); Diaz v. Piquette, 496 So.2d 239 (Fla.App.1986); Neylan v. Moser, 400 N.W.2d 538, 542 (Iowa 1987); Semenza v. Nevada Medical Liab. Ins. Co., 104 Nev. 666, 765 P.2d 184, 18......
-
Grunwald v. Bronkesh
...claim would even have existed if the temporary results of the attorney's conduct had been reversed on appeal...." Diaz v. Piquette, 496 So.2d 239, 240 (Fla.App. 3 Dist.1986), review denied, 506 So.2d 1042 (Fla.1987). The possibility of reversal of the case forming the basis of plaintiff's l......
-
Knight v. Furlow, 87-1140.
...v. Swofford, 495 So.2d 1210 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1986), dismissed for lack of prosecution, 515 So.2d 231 (Fla. 1987); Diaz v. Piquette, 496 So.2d 239 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1986), review denied, 506 So.2d 1042 (Fla. 1987); Bowman v. Abramson, 545 F.Supp. 227 (E.D.Pa. 1982) (interpreting Pennsylvani......
-
Circle Chevrolet Co. v. Giordano, Halleran & Ciesla
...Miller, 138 Ariz. 152, 154, 673 P.2d 792, 794 (1983); Haghayegh v. Clark, 520 So.2d 58, 59 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1988); Diaz v. Piquette, 496 So.2d 239, 240 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986), review denied, 506 So.2d 1042 (Fla.1987). That perception was subsequently confirmed by the Appellate Division in G......
-
4-5 Statute of Limitations
...Enters., Inc. v. Swofford, 495 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 5th Dist. Ct. App. 1986), cause dismissed, 515 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 1987); Diaz v. Piquette, 496 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 3d Dist. Ct. App. 1986); Zakak v. Broida and Napier, P.A., 545 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 2d Dist. Ct. App. 1989).[141] Perez-Abreu, Zamora & ......
-
1-3 First Predicate: Attorney's Employment
...express or implied, with the party for whom he purports to act or someone authorized to represent that party."); Barrios v. Duran, 496 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 3d Dist. Ct. App. 1986) (disputed issue of fact as to the alleged attorney-client relationship precluded summary judgment).[29] Bartholomew......