Legal Opinion

State v. Barley

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 5, 1954No. 361PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohNson, J.

The relation of attorney and client rests on principles of agency, and not guardian and ward. While an attorney has implied authority to make stipulations and decisions in the management or prosecution of an action, such authority is usually limited to matters of procedure, and, in the absence of special authority, ordinarily a stipulation operating as a surrender of a substantial right of the client will not be upheld. See Deitz v. Bolch, 209 N.C. 202, 183 S.E. 384; Bizzell v. Equipment Co., 182 N.C. 98, 108 S.E. 439; 5 Am. Jur., Attorneys at Law, Sections 91 and 92.

The defendant in apt time…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bizzell v. Auto Tire & Equipment Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  2. Deitz v. . BolchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. AliSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
  2. Bailey v. McGillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  3. Chrysler Credit Corp. v. BurtonDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1984
  4. State v. LukerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  5. Schafer v. Barrier Island Station, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1991

9 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