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
Oct 9, 2026
Adam Topel Appointed Chair-Elect of the ABA’s TIPS Appellate Advocacy Committee

Press Release
Oct 8, 2026
Technology Service Corporation Closes on Acquisition by Blackstone-Backed Purchaser

Employment Law Observer
Oct 8, 2026
“We Didn’t Know” is No Longer an Employer Defense for Religious Accommodation Claims Under Title VII

In The News
Oct 8, 2026
Lucy Wang Analyzes What Insurers Need to Know About Two New California Laws

Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter
Oct 8, 2026
The Rise of Management Service Organizations: How Lawyers and Lawmakers are Responding

In The News
Oct 7, 2026
Scott Seaman Discusses Google’s Coverage Battle Over Social Media Addiction Claims

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Oct 6, 2026
Mixed Messages Ongoing as Courts Disagree Whether Texts Constitute “Calls” Under the TCPA





