Seattle partner Ryan G. Foltz and associate Amy P. Taylor recently secured summary judgment dismissal of a complex legal malpractice action against their client defendant, a national legal support services company. The court ruled that all of plaintiffs’ claims were time-barred under the applicable statute of limitations for each cause of action.
The malpractice action stemmed from a service of process failure in an underlying action against a sheriff’s department for civil rights and negligence claims arising out of the execution of a search warrant. The plaintiffs, which included a prominent plaintiff’s law firm, sued defendant for breach of contract, negligence, and violations of the Washington’s Consumer Protection Act based on its failure to complete service of the Summons and Complaint in the underlying action. The plaintiffs argued its current action was tolled during the appeal of the trial court’s dismissal of the underlying action for insufficient service of process. The plaintiffs further argued that damages did not accrue under the discovery rule until the appeals process was complete. Claims splitting, exhaustion, ripeness, and double recovery were additional arguments presented by plaintiffs in an effort to toll the statute of limitations in their action against defendant.
Foltz and Taylor successfully defeated all of plaintiffs’ claims by presenting clear legal briefing and argument squarely rejecting each of plaintiffs’ contentions. In issuing its order, the court agreed with all defendant’s arguments in concluding plaintiffs’ claims were time-barred. The court held that in a malpractice action plaintiffs suffered actual and appreciable harm when the trial court dismissed the underlying action and the claim was not tolled during plaintiffs’ appeal.
Additionally, the court noted plaintiffs’ had not shown how a single mistake by defendant meets the prima facie elements under the Consumer Protection Act, which requires a showing of a generalized course of conduct and public interest impact. In securing a full dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims, Foltz and Taylor showed how complex accrual and tolling arguments can be swiftly handled with strong authority and sound legal argument.