Law Offices of Stanley J. Bell v. Shine, Browne & Diamond

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 651·36 Cal. App. 4th 1011·43 Cal. Rptr. 2d 717·95 Daily Journal DAR 9341·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5552
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 14, 1995A065291California5,838 words

Opinion

Opinion

Haerle, J.

I. Introduction

This is an appeal from a judgment of the San Francisco Superior Court entered after respondents’ demurrer to the appellant’s complaint was sustained without leave to amend. The case presents the issue of whether a 1993 order of the Nevada County Superior Court, entered in an minor’s personal injury action, and purporting to deny appellant’s quantum meruit lien claim for attorney fees in that action, bars a subsequent declaratory relief action with respect to entitlement to those fees. On the facts before us, we hold that it does and hence affirm the judgment.

n. Factual and Procedural Background

The history of this attorney fee dispute starts on January 24, 1992, when Korie Rekers, a minor, was injured in a head-on automobile collision in Nevada County. A guardian ad litem was appointed for her and, in March of 1992, he retained the Nevada City firm of Shine, Browne & Diamond (Shine firm), one of the respondents herein, to represent her in an action for damages for personal injuries. This agreement was approved by the Nevada County Superior Court on April 9, 1992.

Also in April of 1992, the Shine firm entered into a contract with appellant here, the…

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.