In Hughes v. Mahaney & Higgins, 821 S.W.2d 154 (Tex. 1991), the Court articulated two policy considerations as the bases for tolling the statute of limitations when an attorney commits malpractice in the prosecution or defense of a claim that results in litigation until all appeals on the underlying claim are exhausted. Hughes, 821 S.W.2d at 156-57. The Court first pointed out that the legal-injury rule and the discovery rule can force a client into the untenable position of having to adopt inherently inconsistent litigation postures in the underlying case and the malpractice case. Hughes, 821 S.W.2d at 156. The Court then explained that limitations should be tolled for the malpractice action because the viability of that action depends on the outcome of the underlying litigation. Hughes, 821 S.W.2d at 157.