Borissoff v. Taylor & Faust
Filed 4/13/06 Borissoff v. Taylor & Faust CA1/2
Opinion following remand
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
| ROBERT A. BORISSOFF, as Executor, etc., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TAYLOR & FAUST et al., Defendants and Respondents. | A093450 & A094395 (City & County of S.F. Super. Ct. No. 995058) |
We review a second time this malpractice action brought by Robert A. Borissoff (Borissoff), as executor of the estate of Veronica M. Smith (the estate), against the law partnership of Taylor & Faust, partner Leland H. Faust (Faust), and attorney Burton McGovern (McGovern), for claimed malpractice in tax matters while administrators handled the estate.[1] In a trial of specified issues on stipulated facts, the superior court held that the one-year statute of limitation (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.6, subd. (a)) had run before the May 1998 filing of this action, that it had not been tolled by lack of â€
