22 Cal.App.5th 508
Cal. Ct. App.2018Background
- Joyce Lederer hired accounting firm Gursey Schneider LLP (Gursey) to manage family finances and to purchase uninsured/underinsured (UIM) automobile coverage with $5 million limits; Gursey purchased a $1.5 million UIM policy instead.
- Jonathan Lederer (Joyce’s adult son) suffered catastrophic motorcycle injuries in February 2010; plaintiffs learned shortly thereafter the UIM policy limit was $1.5 million.
- Jonathan recovered $15,000 from the other driver in January 2012 and then recovered the $1.5 million UIM policy limits in June 2012; plaintiffs sued Gursey in March 2013 alleging negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and contract/fiduciary claims based on diminished insurance recovery.
- Gursey moved for summary adjudication arguing the two-year statute of limitations (Code Civ. Proc. § 339(1)) began when plaintiffs discovered the insufficient coverage in 2010; Gursey also argued Joyce had no legally cognizable obligation to support Jonathan.
- The trial court granted Gursey’s motion, holding plaintiffs’ claims accrued in 2010 and were time-barred and that Joyce failed to establish a triable issue under Family Code § 3910; the Court of Appeal reversed as to accrual and affirmed as to Joyce’s damages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When did plaintiffs’ causes of action accrue for statute-of-limitations purposes? | Accrual occurred when Jonathan’s UIM claim was resolved/exhausted (Jan–Jun 2012), so the March 2013 suit was timely. | Accrual occurred when plaintiffs discovered Gursey’s negligence in 2010; statute ran from then and barred the suit. | Accrual occurred when plaintiffs suffered actual injury from Gursey’s negligence — i.e., when Jonathan received the diminished UIM payment (June 2012). Trial court erred to the extent it held claims accrued in 2010. |
| Whether Joyce has triable damages under Family Code § 3910 (parental duty to support incapacitated adult child) | Joyce contends she incurred legally cognizable support obligations because Jonathan is incapacitated and without sufficient means, creating a triable issue of fact. | Gursey argues Jonathan continued to work post-accident (same job, income controlled by father), so Joyce has no legal obligation and no triable issue. | Affirmed: plaintiffs failed to show a triable issue that Jonathan is incapacitated from earning a living and without sufficient means under § 3910. Depositions showing post-accident work undermined the declarations. |
Key Cases Cited
- Budd v. Nixen, 6 Cal.3d 195 (1971) (no cause of action arises from a professional breach absent actual, non‑speculative damage)
- Quintano v. Mercury Cas. Co., 11 Cal.4th 1049 (1995) (Ins. Code § 11580.2(p)(3) makes exhaustion of tortfeasor recovery a condition precedent to UIM coverage)
- Jordache Enters., Inc. v. Brobeck, Phleger & Co., 18 Cal.4th 739 (1998) (malpractice claim accrues once plaintiff has suffered appreciable, non‑speculative harm from the attorney’s error)
- Williams v. Hilb, Rogal & Hobbs Ins. Servs. of Cal., 177 Cal.App.4th 624 (2009) (insured did not incur actual injury from insurer/broker error until judgment/settlement established liability in excess of coverage)
- Walker v. Pacific Indem. Co., 183 Cal.App.2d 513 (1960) (broker’s procurement of inadequate limits caused no injury until liability in excess of coverage was established)
- Apple Valley Unified Sch. Dist. v. Vavrinek, Trine, Day & Co., 98 Cal.App.4th 934 (2002) (out‑of‑pocket defense or investigation costs incurred due to another’s tort can constitute actual injury for accrual)