Legal Opinion
Burton v. Kaucher
Louisiana Court of Appeal
Decided November 4, 1925No. 2461PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtReynolds, J.
*76OPINION.
Defendants plea that the contract between plaintiff and his attorney whereby the latter is to receive one-third of whatever amount may be recovered in this-suit as compensation for his services is illegal is not supported by the citation of any authority.
Act 124 of 1906 specially authorizes the making of such a contract by an attorney and his client, and in the case of Smith vs. Vicksburg, Shreveport & Pacific Ry. Co., 112 La. 985, such a contract was duly recognized by the Supreme Court.
Paragraph 2 of Section 21 of the compensation act provides:
“Fees of attorneys and physicians for…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Craft v. Gulf Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- Mack v. LegeaiSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1919
- Quave v. Lott-Batson Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- Smith v. Vicksburg, S. & P. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1904
- Kinney v. EdenbornSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Davis Finance & Securities Co. v. O'NealLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1935
- Bossier v. Louisiana Oil Refining Corp.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1925
- McEachern v. Pine Wood Lbr. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1927