Cox

Cox v. Delmas

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 621·99 Cal. 104·33 P. 836
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 21, 1893No. 14409California3,408 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

This is an action to recover a certain sum of money alleged to have been collected by defendant as attorney- *117 at-law of plaintiff. The case was tried with a jury, and judgment was rendered for plaintiff for a little less than the amount sued for; aud defendant appeals from, the judgment and from an order denying a new trial.

The main features of the case are these: Prior to May, 1888, respondent had been engaged continuously for several years in litigating, as plaintiff, in the courts of this state, the suit of Cox v. McLaughlin, which suit had been brought to recover a large amount alleged to be due from McLaughlin to Cox for work done and materials furnished for the construction of a certain railroad. In 1883 appellant herein was employed by respondent as one of his attorneys-at-law in conducting said suit, and was to receive as compensation for his services as such attorney ten per cent of the amount of the judgment that should be recovered against McLaughlin. He continued to be respondent’s attorney in said suit until it was concluded and settled in 1888.

Prior to said employment of appellant by respondent, the latter had recovered a judgment in the trial court against…

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.