CompFox AI Summary
Roger K. Parsons appealed a trial court's summary judgment in favor of Windle Turley and Windle Turley, P.C., in a legal malpractice suit. Parsons alleged Turley's negligence in representing him in two prior cases against DuPont and Conoco, including failures to investigate, present evidence, join parties, and file timely motions. The trial court granted summary judgment, finding Parsons' claims barred by the statute of limitations. This appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that neither the discovery rule nor the Hughes tolling rule applied, as Parsons had knowledge of the alleged malpractice and had obtained new counsel in the underlying litigation.
Parsons v. Turley is a workers' compensation case decided in Court of Appeals of Texas. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Court of Appeals of Texas.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Roger K. Parsons appealed a trial court's summary judgment in favor of Windle Turley and Windle Turley, P.C., in a legal malpractice suit. Parsons alleged Turley's negligence in representing him in two prior cases against DuPont and Conoco, including failures to investigate, present evidence, join parties, and file timely motions. The trial court granted summary judgment, finding Parsons' claims barred by the statute of limitations. This appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that neither the discovery rule nor the Hughes tolling rule applied, as Parsons had knowledge of the alleged malpractice and had obtained new counsel in the underlying litigation.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.