In April, the Court granted a defendant’s motion for summary judgment where the defendant sought the dismissal of, or summary judgment in, the action on the basis of the statute of limitations.
The plaintiff, Edward Laios, retained attorney Michael Wasylik to file a lawsuit to recover the proceeds of a loan extended by Laios. Laios and Wasylik discussed the representation on December 19, 2001 and, the following day, Wasylik sent a letter to the attorney who referred Laios to him confirming that Wasylik had filed the necessary complaint on Laios' behalf and confirming certain financial terms of the agreement by which Wasylik was representing Laios. There was no handwritten signature on the letter and Laios and Wasylik never signed a written fee agreement.
Wasylik nonsuited Laios’ loan lawsuit on March 24, 2003 and failed to refile the suit within six months or within the original statute of limitations, as required under Virginia law. Laios filed suit against Wasylik in the Fairfax County Circuit Court alleging legal malpractice and breach of contract. Wasylik removed the case to federal court and sought dismissal of the claims pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or, in the alternative, for summary judgment.
Noting that, in Virginia, legal malpractice claims are subject to the statute of limitations for breach of contract, the Court found that the action was governed by Virginia’s three-year statute of limitations for actions to enforce an oral contract. The Court determined that the agreement between Laios and Wasylik was an oral agreement reached on December 19, 2001.
The December 20, 2001 letter sent by Wasylik confirmed the earlier oral agreement but did not constitute a separate written agreement between Laios and Wasylik. In fact, the Court held that the letter could not constitute a written agreement between an attorney and his client because it was sent to the attorney who referred Laios to Wasylik, was missing several essential terms, and did not meet the “complete and concluded” standard set forth in Marley Moldings, Inc. v. Suyat, 970 F.Supp. 496, 499 (W.D. Va. 1997).
Since Laios’ suit against Wasylik was filed after December 19, 2004, it was barred by the statute of limitations. Accordingly, the Court granted summary judgment for Wasylik.
Comments