Case Name: George MARHOLIN and Eleanor Marholin, his wife, Appellants, v. Henry L. KAYE and Whiting National Services, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1987-03-03
Citations: 503 So. 2d 950
Docket Number: No. 86-729
Parties: George MARHOLIN and Eleanor Marholin, his wife, Appellants, v. Henry L. KAYE and Whiting National Services, Appellees.
Judges: Before BARKDULL, DANIEL PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 503
Pages: 950–951

Head Matter:
George MARHOLIN and Eleanor Marholin, his wife, Appellants, v. Henry L. KAYE and Whiting National Services, Appellees.
No. 86-729.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
March 3, 1987.
Rehearing Denied April 1, 1987.
Valdes-Fauli, Cobb & Petrey and James D. Silver and N. Fraser Schuh, III, Miami, for appellants.
Arthur J. Morburger, Weinstein, Bavly & Moon, Miami, for appellees.
Before BARKDULL, DANIEL PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We reverse a summary judgment in favor of an attorney in a malpractice action based on the running of the statute of limitations because there was a material issue of fact as to whether or not the attorney "lulled" his clients into refraining from filing a malpractice action by acknowledging his responsibility for their loss and urging them not to commence such an action in consideration of which he would make them whole, either personally or through his insurance carrier. Parker v. Dinsmore Company, 443 So.2d 356 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Public Health Trust of Dade County v. Prudential Insurance Company, 415 So.2d 896 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Nessim v. DeLoache, 384 So.2d 1341 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Brewer v. Vandervalk, 374 So.2d 553 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Smith v. Hussey, 363 So.2d 1138 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978); Bumby & Stimpson, Inc. v. Southern Reinforcing Steel Co., Inc., 348 So.2d 1216 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.