ST. LOUIS — The Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District partially reversed a legal malpractice case, finding that a 2020 case was timely filed.
The appeal involves a legal malpractice case initiated by Danny Dannenhauer and the Dannenhauer Family Trust against attorney John Briscoe and his law firm, Briscoe and Brannon, and the Wasinger Parham law firm.
The crux of the dispute centers on allegations of negligence related to a real estate transaction involving a 330-acre farm, which led to subsequent litigation and legal malpractice claims, Judge James M. Dowd wrote in the July 23 opinion.
Judges John P. Torbitzky and Michael S. Wright also concurred in the opinion.
In 2011, Dannenhauer, who had been leasing the farm from C.T. and V.T., discussed purchasing the property with them. V.T., acting as C.T.'s attorney-in-fact due to C.T.'s declining health, agreed to deed the farm to Dannenhauer.
The transfer was formalized by Briscoe on Jan. 19, 2012, through a warranty deed executed by V.T.
However, Dannenhauer later contended that Briscoe had committed several errors: failing to ensure conflict waivers were signed, not verifying V.T.'s authority to transfer C.T.’s property, neglecting to include Dannenhauer's rental obligation in the deed, and not advising that a contract of sale was necessary, according to the opinion.
The integrity of the transaction was challenged in July 2014 when V.T.'s granddaughter filed a lawsuit against Dannenhauer to invalidate the deed, claiming V.T. lacked the authority to transfer the property and alleging undue influence by Dannenhauer.
Briscoe referred Dannenhauer to Neil Maune of the Wasinger Parham firm for defense.
The initial court ruling was rendered on July 31, 2017, and upheld after a retrial on June 13, 2019, found in favor of the granddaughter, voiding the deed.
An appellate court upheld the court's decision on May 19, 2020.
Dannenhauer and the trust filed their legal malpractice suit against Briscoe and Wasinger Parham on Nov. 19, 2020.
The trial court granted summary judgment for Briscoe, determining that the statute of limitations had expired since Dannenhauer’s claim accrued on July 29, 2014, when the granddaughter’s lawsuit was served.
This judgment was based on the premise that Dannenhauer should have been aware of potential malpractice at that time. The case against Wasinger Parham, which had resulted in a $750,000 verdict for Dannenhauer due to Maune’s failure to notify him of a potential malpractice claim against Briscoe, was later overturned by the court through a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) because Wasinger Parham no longer represented Dannenhauer when the statute of limitations expired, Dowd wrote.
Dannenhauer appealed the decisions. The appellate court agreed with Dannenhauer's argument that the trial court erred in determining the statute of limitations began on July 29, 2014.
The court reasoned that a reasonable person would not have been put on notice of potential malpractice merely from being served with the granddaughter’s lawsuit, especially given the complexity of the claims and Briscoe’s earlier assurances.
The damages were not ascertainable until the legal proceedings conclusively determined the deed was invalid, which occurred no earlier than July 31, 2017, and possibly later.
The appellate court reversed the summary judgment in favor of Briscoe, ruling that Dannenhauer’s legal malpractice claim was timely.
The court also upheld the JNOV in favor of Wasinger Parham, as their duty had ended before the statute of limitations expired.
The case was remanded for adjudication of the malpractice claims against Briscoe on their merits.
The appellants were represented by Jeremy Andrew Gogel.
The respondents are represented by Theodore G. Pashos; and James C. Leritz, Richard C. Wuestling IV and Susan M. Dimond.
Attorneys declined to comment further on the case.
Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District case number: ED111979