Rallis v. Cassady (2000)

Second Dist., Div. Three.

Nov. 20, 2000.]

[Modification of Opinion (84 Cal. App. 4th 285 ) on denial of petition for rehearing with no change in judgment.]

RALLIE P. RALLIS, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. RALPH CASSADY et al., Defendants and Respondents.

THE COURT.-

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on October 24, 2000, be modified as follows:

1. On Page 12, line 3 [84 Cal. App. 4th 296 , advance report, 4th par., lines 1-2 (correction made in adv. rep. opn.)], change "Rallis' " to "Rallis's so that line 3 reads as follows:

Understandably, the defendants dispute each and every one of Rallis's contentions

2. On Page 19 [84 Cal. App. 4th 301 , advance report], delete the text of footnote 14, and insert the following in its place:

Rallis does not challenge the trial court's determination that he discovered or reasonably should have discovered all of the alleged malpractice more than one year before filing his complaint in this action or argue that he did not suffer an actual injury arising from the defendants' alleged malpractice in the Florida litigation more than one year before filing his complaint.

3. On Page 21, line 2 [84 Cal. App. 4th 302 , advance report, 2d par., lines 2-3], the text "determination that he suffered actual injury with respect to each malpractice claim more" is modified to read as follows:

determination that he suffered actual injury with respect to the malpractice claims more

There is no change in the judgment.

Appellant's petition for rehearing is denied.