# Willis v. Maverick

> Texas Supreme Court · July 6, 1988 · 31 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 569

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9766846

## Case

- **Full name:** Yvonne WILLIS, Petitioner, v. Chilton MAVERICK, Respondent
- **Court:** Texas Supreme Court
- **Decided:** July 6, 1988
- **Citations:** 31 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 569; 760 S.W.2d 642; 1988 Tex. LEXIS 85; 1988 WL 68436
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Gonzalez
- **Judges:** Culver, Gonzalez, Kilgarlin, Mauzy, Robertson
- **Cited by:** 550 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9766846

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the “injury” in legal malpractice cases is inherently undiscoverable, reasoning that “[i]t is unrealistic to expect a layman client to have sufficient legal acumen to perceive an injury at the time of the negligent act or omission of his attorney”
- reasoning that legal malpractice is in nature of tort and therefore subject to two-year limitations period for torts established by section 16.003 of Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code
- holding that even in the context of legal malpractice actions, claimants are not excused from exercising “reasonable care and diligence” to discover facts of claim
- stating that an attorney is obligated to use the skill, prudence and diligence commonly exercised, by practitioners of his profession

## Opinion text

GONZALEZ, Justice,
concurring and dissenting.
For the reasons stated in Chief Justice Cadena’s dissenting opinion, 723 S.W.2d at 262, I would reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and remand this cause for a new trial.
CULVER, J., joins in this concurring and dissenting opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9766846. Public record. Not legal advice.