Swaim v. Martin
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, J.,
(after stating the facts). The procuring of the conveyance of the Carlisle property from Martin to Swaim was during the existence of the relation of attorney and client. In such oases the burden is upon the attorney of proving the fairness and equity of the transaction and the adequacy of the consideration, and, upon his failure to make such proof, a court of equity will treat the case as one of constructive fraud. The reason is that the relation of client and attorney is one of trust and confidence requiring a high degree of fidelity and good faith. Thweatt v. Freeman, 73 Ark. 575,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Thweatt v. FreemanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- McMillan v. BrookfieldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
3Cited by17 opinions
- Flanagan v. DeLappSupreme Court of Missouri · 1976
- Hardin v. BaynesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
- Duvall v. Laws, Swain & Murdoch, P.A.Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 1990
- Bond v. MarlinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1940
- Goode v. KingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.