• June 2, 2011

One of the more common forms of attorney malpractice is the failure to protect clients from statutes of limitation.  A client comes to Lawyer on Day #1, when she has a valid claim, but Lawyer only drills down on the case later.  In the interim, the statute of limitation has accrued to bar the cause of action.

There is a less common flipside to this:  the erroneous advice that a claim is barred by applicable statutes of limitation.

Another issue to stay on top of:  under Minnesota law, there is now clear authority that one can “renew” a judgment before the ten-year statutory period for the judgment lapses.   Attorneys will need to make sure that clients are aware of this option as their judgments age so a client does not miss the chance of recovering on an old judgment in his favor.  (The key case is here.  Its beneficial application is shown here (this week the Minnesota Supreme Court denied review of this Court of Appeals decision)).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *