Legal Opinion

Klabacka v. Schott

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1964PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

The appeal raises the question of the reasonableness of the 33% percent contingent-fee contract for the legal services rendered on behalf of the injured incompetent in the negligence case. The appellant advances two propositions: (1) That in a negligence case a contingent-fee contract for one third of the gross recovery under any condition is reasonable, and (2) substantially all preparation for trial had been made and under the State Bar schedule of minimum fees he was entitled to 33% percent.

When the contract was entered into Mrs. Louise Schott was not the guárdian of her son and after she…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Touchett v. E Z Paintr Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Conway v. Sauk CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Abrams v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Galster v. First National Bank of KenoshaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Guardianship of MesserWisconsin Supreme Court · 1942

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Kluenker v. StateCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1982
  2. Markwardt v. Zurich American InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2006
  3. In Matter of Guardianship & Estate of PAHCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1983
  4. Markwardt v. Zurich American InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API