Legal Opinion

Heinzman v. Fine, Fine, Legum & Fine

Supreme Court of Virginia

Decided April 22, 1977No. Record 760492PublishedCited by 50 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPoff, J.

We consider whether, when an attorney employed under a contingent fee contract is discharged without just cause and the client employs another attorney who effects a settlement, the discharged attorney is entitled to the contractual fee or to a fee based upon quantum meruit for services rendered prior to discharge. The fee in issue was awarded to Fine, Fine, Legum & Fine, Attorneys at Law (hereinafter, Legum), in orders approving settlement of a claim for damages for personal injuries growing out of an automobile accident. These orders were entered in a suit filed by attorney Augustus Anninos…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Fracasse v. BrentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Martin v. . CampNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  3. County of Campbell v. HowardSupreme Court of Virginia · 1922
  4. Krippner v. MatzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
  5. Dolph v. SpeckartOregon Supreme Court · 1919

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by50 opinions

  1. Rhoades v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Cohen v. Radio-Electronics Officers Union District 3Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1996
  3. Succession of WallaceSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1991
  4. Covington v. RhodesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  5. Hughes v. ColeSupreme Court of Virginia · 1996

45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API