Newnan v. Washington
Tennessee Supreme Court
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by Washington against Newnan, upon a quantum meruit, for professional services, rendered by Washington, as an attorney at law; to which the defendant pleaded the general issue. The plaintiff below obtained a verdict in the county court for 315 dollars. A rule, to show cause why a new trial should not be granted him, was obtained by Newnan, which the county court, after argument' had thereon, discharged.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by Washington against Newnan, upon a quantum meruit, for professional services, rendered by Washington, as an attorney at law; to which the defendant pleaded the general issue. The plaintiff below obtained a verdict in the county court for 315 dollars. A rule, to show cause why a new trial should not be granted him, was obtained by Newnan, which the county court, after argument' had thereon, discharged. Newnan filed an exception to the opinion of the court, in refusing to award a new trial, and moved the cause by writ of error'into the circuit court;…
1Opinion of the CourtCrabb, J.
delivered the opinion of the court; (absent judge Catron.) This is an action brought by the defendant in error, an attorney at law, against the defendant, upon a quantum meruit for professional services. The defendant says, that the plaintiff cannot recover, because the profession of the law is of an honorable character, and services rendered by its professors gratuitous. The law in England is certainly as contended for, both in relation to counsellors and physicians. But the doctrine has not prevailed in this state, with regard to either. It has been common here, for *81professional men, as…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Dunbar v. WilliamsNew York Supreme Court · 1813
- Everts v. AdamsNew York Supreme Court · 1815
3Cited by1 opinion
- Interstate Life & Accident Insurance v. RKO Teleradio Pictures, Inc.District Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1962