Ford

Ford v. Cannon

Good Law
1907 Cal. App. LEXIS 198·5 Cal. App. 185·89 P. 1071
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 12, 1907Civ. No. 336.California997 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

The action is based upon an alleged trust agreement. By the complaint it appears that one of the defendants, Samuel C. Pierce, had a cause of action for damages against the Mountain Copper Company. He entered into an agreement with plaintiff, who is an attorney at law, whereby the latter was to furnish all the money necessary for the prosecution of said cause of action and also to act as the attorney of the former in whatever proceeding was required, and it was agreed that Ford should receive for such services one-half of the amount recovered by suit, compromise or otherwise. Thereafter plaintiff entered into an agreement with Freeman, Cannon and one Charles L. Donohoe, whereby the last three were to perform said services and pay all the costs, and the four, after deducting the costs, were to share equally the amount received, to wit, one-half of what was recovered. It was further agreed that defendants, Freeman and Donohoe, should secure from Pierce a new contract in pursuance of said arrangement. Accordingly, Pierce and Freeman entered into a written contract whereby Freeman was to represent him in the litigation, advancing all the costs and receiving for his services one-half…

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.