Lester v. Dawson
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
TOAL, Justice:
In this attorneys’ fee dispute, Appellant Dawson (“Client”) argues he was entitled to a trial by jury. Because Dawson did not timely appeal the denial of his request for a jury trial, he is barred from bringing this appeal. However, we take this opportunity to clarify that an action by an attorney for recovery of sums owed under a fee agreement between the attorney and his client constitutes an action in law with the right to a trial by jury.
Factual/Procedural Background
Attorney Ken Lester (“Attorney”) represented Client in a domestic matter. Client paid Attorney a $5000…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Trist v. ChildSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Litman v. FINE, JACOBSON, SCHWARTZDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
- Pelfrey Ex Rel. Associated Railway Contractors, Inc. v. Bank of GreerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1978
- Foggie v. CSX Transportation, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1993
- Creed v. StokesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1985
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- First Union Nat. Bank of SC v. SodenCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1998
- Verenes v. AlvanosSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2010
- Webb v. CSX Transportation, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
- Flagstar Corp. v. Royal Surplus LinesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
- Satcher v. SatcherCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2002
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.