Legal Opinion
Byrd v. Clark
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided June 17, 1930No. 7564PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHines, J.
1. A contract by which a client employed an attorney, and in which it was agreed that the attorney, for services already rendered’ and for services to be rendered in the future, should have 40 per cent, of all moneys and property received for the client in the litigation in which he was employed, provided for conditional compensation of the attorney.
2. Where there is an agreement for the payment of a contingent fee, the happening of the contingency is a condition precedent to the right of the attorney to recovery for his services, and the precise event which was contemplated must happen.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Dearing v. Bank of CharlestonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1848
- Hood v. HoodSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
- Adams v. LamarSupreme Court of Georgia · 1850
- Pike v. WassellSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Moses v. Bagley & SewellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1875
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Venable v. BlockCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
- Strickland v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1959
- Dorsey v. EdgeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1947
- Overman v. All Cities Transfer Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1985
- Brookhaven Supply Co. v. RaryCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.