Tennessee Cases Illustrate the Need to Timely File Your Legal Malpractice Claim

By Thomas Greer | November 20, 2013

The statute of limitations for filing a legal malpractice action is not always easily calculated.  According to the Tennessee Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2), the statute of limitations for bringing a legal malpractice claim is one year from when the cause of action accrues.  When a cause of action accrues is determined by applying the discovery rule.  Under the discovery rule, a cause of action accrues when the plaintiff knows or should know, in exercising reasonable diligence, that an injury has been sustained due to wrongful conduct by the defendant.  For some plaintiffs, defining the time at which they should have known of the injury becomes difficult.  A failure to file within the one year statute of limitations will generally prove fatal for a legal malpractice case.

Two cases arising out of Tennessee highlight the need for plaintiffs to carefully calculate the statute of limitations, and the benefit of consulting with an outside attorney early on so you receive expert assistance in your calculations.  The first case is that of Chrisman v. Baker, a Tennessee Court of Appeals case.  In Chrisman, the attorney defendant represented the plaintiff in her capacity as conservator and later administrator of an estate.  In a 1997 hearing before the probate judge, the judge stated that the manner in which plaintiff compensated herself was not legal and the judge intended to remove her as conservator.

Following the hearing, the defendant acknowledged advising plaintiff to use an improper payment method but assured her that her claim for services would still be honored.  The defendant, however, proved incorrect.  In 2002, plaintiff’s petition for caretaker services was denied.  One year later, in 2003, plaintiff initiated a legal malpractice claim against her attorney, indicating that the denial of her claim in 2002 was the first instance in which she knew of her attorney’s negligence.  The attorney, however, countered that the suit should be dismissed as it was filed beyond the statute of limitations.  The court of appeal sided with the attorney.  The court held that the plaintiff should have known of the negligence following that 1997 hearing and her attorney’s erroneous legal advice could not toll the statute of limitations.

The same result was reached in a case arising out of the Middle District of Tennessee.  In the case of Sommer v. Womick, the plaintiffs initially filed a medical malpractice action which was dismissed for lack of an expert medical witness.  The dismissal came in 2001, and the plaintiffs took an appeal to the Sixth Circuit, which affirmed the trial court in 2003.  Months after the court of appeals decision, the plaintiffs initiated a legal malpractice suit against their former counsel.  The attorney defendant moved for dismissal, urging the action was not timely as plaintiffs knew of an actionable wrong following dismissal of the initial lawsuit in the district court.

The trial court agreed with the defendant and dismissed the suit.  The court of appeals affirmed, finding that although it led to a harsh result, the statute began to toll after that initial dismissal.

These two cases serve as important learning tools for Tennesseans who believe they may have been the victims of legal malpractice.  As the cases demonstrate, it is vital that you act diligently in pursuing any potential claim of legal malpractice as soon as you become aware of the possibility of an actionable wrong.  Waiting too long can cost you the entire action.

At Bailey & Greer, PLLC, our Tennessee medical malpractice attorneys can provide you with the experienced legal assistance you need to properly calculate the statute of limitations and ensure your action is timely filed.  Don’t wait until it is too late; call us today at 901-680-9777 for immediate legal assistance.

Posted in Blog

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.