(California Court of Appeal) - In a legal malpractice case,in which former counsel moved to withdraw from representing a client, alleging another attorney had agreed to handle--and was already handling--postjudgment motions, and that the other attorney would also handle the appeal of an adverse judgment,and the client sued former counsel for malpractice more than one year after the motion to withdraw was made, but less than one year after the motion was granted, or the trial court properly summary judgment to former counsel is affirmed where,based on the one-year statute of limitation if by Code of Civil Procedure section 340.6, the client could not have had an objectively fair expectation that former counsel was continuing to represent him after the motion to withdraw had been served.
Source: findlaw.com