California Statute Modifies Limitations Period for Certain Malpractice Claims Against Criminal Lawyers
Lawyers for the Profession® Alert
Lawyers for the Profession® Alert | 1 min read
Aug 17, 2010
California Assembly Bill No. 316, 2009-10 Reg. Sess. § 2 (2009)
Brief Summary
The California legislature, in what is believed to be the first instance of its kind in the nation, has enacted a law specifically addressed to the statute of limitations for actions by wrongfully-convicted persons against their attorneys, when proof of innocence is an element of the claim. The new law sets the time limit at two years from the date of post-conviction exoneration.
Complete Summary
A 2009 amendment to the California statute of limitations for actions against attorneys (Assembly Bill No. 316) added the following language to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 340.6(a):
If the plaintiff is required to establish his or her factual innocence for an underlying criminal charge as an element of his or her claim, the action shall be commenced within two years after the plaintiff achieves post-conviction exoneration in the form of a final judicial disposition of the criminal case.
In Section 1 of the bill, the legislature declared that its intent was to “remedy some of the harm caused to all factually innocent people who have been wrongfully convicted[,]” and to “remove some of the obstacles to compensation for the factually innocent and . . . ease their transition back into society.”
Significance of Amendment
In what is believed to be the first law in the nation addressed specifically to the statute of limitations for claims of negligence by criminal defense lawyers when a client must establish factual innocence as an element of a claim, California has modified the potential period of exposure and made clear that exoneration is required to trigger the statute. It remains to be seen whether other states may follow California’s example.
This alert has been prepared by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. It is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship.
Related Capabilities
Featured Insights

Press Release
Sep 18, 2026
Paris Glazer Named to Chicago Daily Law Bulletin’s 2026 40 Attorneys Under Forty

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Sep 17, 2026
Federal and State Regulators Continue Crackdown on Junk Fees

Press Release
Sep 17, 2026
Defense Verdict Reduces $134 Million Demand to $2 Million in Catastrophic Motorcycle Injury Case

Insights for Insurers Alert
Sep 16, 2026
America 250: The Nation’s Unique Contributions to Insurance Coverage Law and Litigation

In The News
Sep 15, 2026
Lucy Wang Discusses the California Insurance Commissioner’s Role in Protecting Consumers

Press Release
Sep 10, 2026
Hinshaw Attorneys Recognized as 2027 Lexology Index Thought Leaders: USA

In The News
Sep 10, 2026
Nicholas Ajello and Gregory Emry Analyze FAA’s Proposed BVLOS Drone Regulations

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Sep 9, 2026
“Play Now, Arbitrate Later”—“Not So Fast,” Ninth Circuit Says

In The News
Sep 9, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Discusses “Patchwork” of Laws Targeting Personalized Pricing

Employment Law Observer
Sep 8, 2026
Five Workplace Issues Every Employer Should Address Before They Become a Costly Lawsuit

Press Release
Sep 8, 2026
Jim Sandy Appointed Chair of ABA Debt Collection and Bankruptcy Subcommittee

