Last year the Texas Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s granting of summary judgment in favor of two law firms and three attorneys. The plaintiff, a company named “Target Strike,” lost an underlying multi-million dollar lawsuit alleging the misuse of its confidential information regarding mining claims in Nevada. More specifically, Target Strike alleged that its case would not have been thrown out had it been filed in Nevada rather than Texas, as Nevada had a more forgiving statute of limitations. Another issue on appeal was whether or not the plaintiff even retained the defendants to represent them before the statutes of limitations had run. Even though the law firms and attorneys had prevailed, this case is a cautionary tale for both plaintiffs and the attorneys that represent them. The case Opinion can be read in its entirety here. The citation is Target Strike, Inc. v. Stradburger & Price, et al., (No. 05-18-00434CV)(Tx. App. 2018).
My firm has represented plaintiffs in legal malpractice cases. But as with all of our cases, we are wary of causes of action that likely accrued a year or even several years earlier. Sometimes the delay in seeking out an attorney and filing the case is the result of a prior (but terminated) counsel’s dilatory conduct. Other times it is simply a result of procrastination by the client himself/herself. Regardless who is to blame, if you are considering bringing a malpractice suit of any kind, you must be attentive to the delicate balance of doing your due-diligence, and missing a deadline that could eliminate your right to remedy your losses. Food for thought!