Sharpstein v. Friedlander
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment for defendánt in the Fifteenth District Court, City and County of San Francisco: The agreement referred to in the opinion is as follows, viz: “ In consideration of professional services rendered for me by J. R. Sharpstein, an attorney-at-law, in obtaining a settlement of a claim which I had against Robert Shechy, by which settlement I obtained from said Sheeliy his two promissory notes for five thousand dollars each, payable respectively on September…
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment for defendánt in the Fifteenth District Court, City and County of San Francisco: The agreement referred to in the opinion is as follows, viz: “ In consideration of professional services rendered for me by J. R. Sharpstein, an attorney-at-law, in obtaining a settlement of a claim which I had against Robert Shechy, by which settlement I obtained from said Sheeliy his two promissory notes for five thousand dollars each, payable respectively on September 1st, 1878, and July 1st, 1879,1 hereby agree to hold said notes, and to collect them when theji and each of them shall…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The contract on the part of Friedlander was to pay to the plaintiff one-half of any sum he might receive from Sheehv on the notes, or on either of them. Friedlander never did in his lifetime receive from Shcehy any sum on the notes, or on either of them. There was therefore no cause of action against Fried-lander in his lifetime, in favor of the plaintiff, by reason of the agreement set forth in the complaint. It is true that Fried-lander had, before his death, transferred one of the notes for value to the Nevada Bank, but he presumptively remained liable to the bank as indorser…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Roach v. CaraffaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Sharpstein v. FriedlanderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Newbery v. WilkinsonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Washington · 1911