Vowell & Meelheim v. Beddow, Erben & Bowen, Pa
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
These appeals arise out of a dispute between lawyer J. Scott Vowell and Vowell Meelheim, P.C., and Beddow, Erben Bowen, P.A. ("Beddow"), regarding the division of the legal fees received in four contingency fee cases. The trial court conducted an ore tenus proceeding and issued a comprehensive order containing a detailed statement of the facts as well as an exhaustive discussion of the applicable law. The trial court entered a judgment against Vowell and the Vowell firm and in favor of the Beddow firm, in the amount of $220,891.15. Specifically, the trial court held that Vowell was entitled…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Meinhard v. SalmonNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Meehan v. SHAUGHNESSY COHENMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
- Marvin's, Inc. v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1992
- Jewel v. BoxerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Ellerby v. SpiezerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Dowd & Dowd, Ltd. v. GleasonIllinois Supreme Court · 1998
- Dowd and Dowd, Ltd. v. GleasonAppellate Court of Illinois · 2004
- Cunningham v. Langston, Frazer, Sweet & FreeseSupreme Court of Alabama · 1999
- LaFond v. SweeneySupreme Court of Colorado · 2015
- Larry Karchmar, Ltd. v. NevoralAppellate Court of Illinois · 1999
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.