Mansur v. Botts
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Linn Circuit Court. —Hon. C. Boardman, Special Judge. Reversed. As the plaintiff (respondent here) sues upon an account and seeks to recover as upon a quantum meruit, for his legal services rendered in the suits mentioned in his petition, the court erred in permitting respondent to introduce evidence tending to show a special contract fixing his compensation for said services in the two suits against the sheriffs of Linn county, for the following reasons: 1.…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Linn Circuit Court. —Hon. C. Boardman, Special Judge. Reversed. As the plaintiff (respondent here) sues upon an account and seeks to recover as upon a quantum meruit, for his legal services rendered in the suits mentioned in his petition, the court erred in permitting respondent to introduce evidence tending to show a special contract fixing his compensation for said services in the two suits against the sheriffs of Linn county, for the following reasons: 1. Because the special contract disclosed by the testimony constitutes a different cause of action from that alleged in the…
1Opinion of the Court
Philips, C.
This is an action in assumpsit by plaintiff, Mansur, to recover for services as an attorney at law rendered by him to defendant, in three suits in the Linn circuit court. The action is in form as for a quantum meruit, accompanied with an itemized account.
The answer, after denying the allegations of the petj*654tion, except as thereinafter admitted, avers that the suits for which plaintiff sues for services, were brought at the instance of plaintiff, and that he agreed to attend to the same, as an attorney, on condition that, if he did not succeed in realizing the money sought to be…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Marine Ins. Co. of Alexandria v. HodgsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1813
- Dermott v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1865
- Iron Mountain Bank v. MurdockSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company v. Knapp and OthersSupreme Court of the United States · 1835
- Fitzgerald v. HaywardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- Williams v. Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Degonia v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Moore v. H. Gaus & Sons Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Plummer v. TrostSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- American Surety Co. v. Fruin-Bambrick Construction Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1914
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.