HOLDINGS: [1]-An attorney’s failure to obtain a client’s signature under Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6148, subd. (a), on an engagement letter rendered the alleged attorney fee agreement voidable under § 6148, subd. (c), and an electronic acceptance argument lacked merit; [2]-Repudiating the engagement letter and not paying an invoice effectively voided the alleged agreement; [3]-There was no implied-in-fact agreement under § 6148, subd. (d), because the services materially differed from those previously rendered; [4]-A quantum meruit claim under § 6148, subd. (c), was time-barred under Code Civ. Proc., § 339, subd. 1, because it was filed more than two years after the representation ended; [5]-An account stated claim failed because consent to pay was not shown and because the four-year limitation period in Code Civ. Proc., § 337, subd. 2(2), did not apply absent a written contract.

California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. are California Corporate Attorneys


Judgment affirmed.

Procedural Posture Previous post Procedural Posture
Key Points To Check Before Calling An Electrician Next post Key Points To Check Before Calling An Electrician