Plaintiffs have not alleged fraud or fraudulent conceal- ment of a cause of action. The file does not belong to the estate. It is the attorney's file. There may be something in the file that is owned by the plaintiffs but it is not alleged nor in the record. In addition, I believe Frederickson is distinguished in that the decedent was an active participant in the contract, i.e., to hold a deposit.
Hermitage refers to hardship to the plaintiff.
If it is hardship to the plaintiffs, it could be a nightmare to defendants. This case involves one or two files, but its impact affects every file in a law firm. To allow a descendant of a client to demand a long-closed file would require the law firm, or its successor, to maintain files indefinitely. No wrongful act would occur triggering the statute of limitations until the rejection of the demand for possession. It can be argued that the attorney-client relationship, by its very nature, makes the attorney the agent of the client for maintenance of a closed file in the absence of some express language to the contrary.