In Re the Marriage of Tushinsky

Bad Law
1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 682·203 Cal. App. 3d 136·249 Cal. Rptr. 611
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 27, 1988B018597California2,366 words

Opinion

Opinion

Danielson, J.

Ronald S. Marks (Marks) and Robert L. Stevenson (Stevenson; collectively, Marks & Stevenson) purport to appeal from that portion of the judgment entered on November 18, 1985, denying their request for attorney’s fees and their request for imposition of an attorney’s lien for services rendered on behalf of Rebecca Tushinsky (Rebecca).

We dismiss the appeal because of appellants’ lack of standing to appeal.

Procedural and Factual Statement

On February 10, 1983, Rebecca retained Marks & Stevenson to represent her in a dissolution action against her former husband, Joseph Tushinsky (Joseph). Pursuant to the retainer agreement Rebecca agreed to pay Marks & Stevenson a retainer of $2,000 and legal fees of $150 per hour. She also agreed to give the law firm a lien on any settlement or judgment obtained in that action for unpaid fees.

On December 23, 1983, Rebecca retained Marks & Stevenson to represent her in a malicious prosecution action brought against her by Joseph. The retainer agreement expressly provided that “if client [Rebecca] has no ability to pay Attorneys for said services, Attorneys agree to be paid from the proceeds that [Rebecca] shall receive in her…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.