Legal Opinion

Gemmel v. Brydon

Baltimore City Circuit Court

Decided July 10, 1890Published

1Opinion of the CourtDuffy, J.

1st. As to the fees of Poe, Walsh and Carter. — These gentlemen were employed by Brydon to prosecute the case against the B. & O. R. R. and were to be paid for their services contingent fees out of the sum recovered. The contract upon which the suit was brought was made in the name of Brydon and allowed to remain in his name with the assent of Gemmel & Sinclair, who knew of the employment of these counsel by Brydon, had interviews as witnesses with them and never made any objection to their employment. While it is true that the putting of the contract in his own name was a fraud by Brydon…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hall v. RidgelyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1870

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

Powered by the Exa API