In Clark v. City of Compton (1971) 22 Cal.App.3d 522, the attorney whom plaintiffs had retained within a week of the accident failed to file a claim with the city within the prescribed 100-day period, and when, 11 months after the accident, application was made by their new attorney to file a late claim, it was rejected. Plaintiffs then sought judicial relief, alleging that during the 100-day period they had been incapacitated by their injuries. The trial court's denial of relief was affirmed by the Court of Appeal which observed there was a conflict in the affidavits as to the extent of plaintiffs' injuries and their incapacity during the 100-day period (22 Cal.App.3d at p. 527). The court also noted there had been no showing that the plaintiffs' first attorney had been guilty of any positive misconduct toward the plaintiffs such as making any misrepresentations to them. Moreover, the trial court had impliedly found the plaintiffs had not acted with due diligence in seeking to discover their attorney's neglect and moving for relief thereafter. From all of this, the Clark court observed that plaintiffs' 11 month delay in seeking leave to file a late claim could not be held reasonable as a matter of law. (22 Cal.App.3d at pp. 527-529.)