Pancake House, Inc. v. Redmond Ex Rel. Redmond

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that “[wjhere the essential claim of the action is a breach of a duty imposed by law upon the relationship of attorney/client[,] ... the action is in tort”
• recognizing one theory of accrual is that “the client does not accrue a cause of action for malpractice until he suffers appreciable harm or actual damage as a consequence of his lawyer’s conduct”
• identifying one Kansas Supreme Court case in which claims sounded in contract and noting that “[n]ot all malpractice actions in Kansas may be deemed tort actions”
• client corporation’s claim against former attorney based on suit by former attorney against corporation did not accrue until judgment was entered in underlying suit
• “Legal ... malpractice generally constitute^] both a tort and a breach of contract.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).