Legal Opinion
Faber v. Enkema
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided May 29, 1930No. 28,012PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Action to recover attorney’s fees retained by the defendant, the plaintiff’s attorney, from money collected by him for her. The defendant demurred to the complaint, the demurrer.was sustained, and the plaintiff‘appeals.
An attorney at law who is unfaithful to his client and guilty of fraud in the trust relation existing between them forfeits his right to compensation. Davis v. Swedish-Am. Nat. Bank, 78 Minn. 408, 80 N. W. 953, 81 N. W. 210, 79 A. S. R. 400; Blackey v. Alexander, 156 Minn. 478, 195 N. W. 455; In re Disbarment of Buck, 171 Minn. 352, 214 N. W. 662; 1 Dunnell, Minn. Dig. (2 ed.)…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Davis v. Swedish-American National BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- Church v. OdellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Venie v. Harriet State Bank of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Blackey v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
- De La Motte v. Northwestern Clearance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Rice v. PerlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Gilchrist v. PerlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
- Rippey v. WilsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
- Anderson v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
- Locals 1140 & 1145, United Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers of America v. United Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers of AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.