Dickerson v. Contra Costa County

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California grants Defendants’ motion to dismiss Jermaine Demel Dickerson’s legal malpractice action as untimely. The court holds that the 2009 amendment to California Code of Civil Procedure section 340.6, which provides a limitations period for malpractice claims requiring proof of factual innocence, does not apply retroactively to revive the time-barred claim. The court denies leave to amend, directs entry of judgment for Defendants, and closes the case.

Holdings

1. The 2009 amendment to section 340.6 does not apply retroactively absent an express or sufficiently clear indication of legislative intent, and it therefore cannot revive Plaintiff's claim, which was already time-barred under the prior statute.
2. Plaintiff's legal malpractice claim was time-barred because the alleged wrongful act occurred on December 4, 1998, and the applicable version of section 340.6 imposed an outside four-year limitations period that expired on December 4, 2002.
3. Leave to amend was properly denied because the deficiencies in the complaint could not be cured by alleging additional facts.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the 2009 amendment to California Code of Civil Procedure section 340.6, which provides a two-year period after postconviction exoneration for certain legal malpractice claims, applies retroactively to revive a claim that was already time-barred under the prior version of the statute.
2. Whether Plaintiff's legal malpractice complaint was barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
3. Whether leave to amend should be granted after dismissal.

Disposition

dismissed