The SD
Supreme Court handed down one decision this morning, holding inter alia:
1) Attorney malpractice claim,
coupled with claims for fraud and deceit, defeated by statute of limitations
Summary
follows:
SLOTA v.
IMHOFF, 2020 S.D. 55: This is a legal
malpractice claim, coupled with claims of fraud and deceit, brought against
attorneys who served as defense counsel for plaintiff who was prosecuted for
1st degree rape. Plaintiff was indicted
in 2013 and convicted by jury in 2014.
Plaintiff was sentenced to 30 years in prison, with the conviction being
affirmed in 2015. While in prison,
Plaintiff brought a habeas corpus action (in SD state court) which was
successful in 2017 resulting in Plaintiff being released from custody. This
action was commenced more than 3 years after the attorney client relationship
ended. The trial court dismissed all
claims on the basis of South Dakota's 3 year statute of limitations for legal
malpractice. SDCL 15-2-14.2. Plaintiff
appeals the dismissal of the fraud and deceit claims. The SD Supreme Court affirmed, holding that
Plaintiff, “has no independent cause of action for fraud that has not been
extinguished by the repose statute,” and that his fraud and deceit claims, “cannot
be untethered from the malpractice claims.”
This
decision is unanimous (5-0) with opinion authored by Justice Jensen.
The facts
surrounding the hiring of counsel by Plaintiff in 2013, when Defendant was indicted,
bear some significance. Accordingly, ¶ 3
and part of ¶ 4 from the opinion are set forth below:
[¶3.] Slota and his wife began a search to retain
private counsel to defend Slota on the charges. They located Imhoff, a
California law firm. Imhoff’s website displayed phrases such as “We have
well-versed knowledge regarding laws in each state . . . . You can rest assured
in knowing we will do everything in our power to secure the most favorable
outcome possible . . . . We provide high-quality legal representation in 48
states . . . . Our firm can vigorously defend your rights, liberties, and
reputation against child molestation charges.”
[¶4.] Slota retained Imhoff to defend him. Imhoff
hired South Dakota attorneys ... to assist in his defense.
This decision
may be accessed at
http://ujs.sd.gov/Supreme_Court/opinions.aspx .
