Legal Opinion
Ross v. Scannell
Washington Supreme Court
Decided July 8, 1982No. 47861-9PublishedCited by 48 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDimmick, J.
This case was certified here by the Court of Appeals, Division Three. The issues as certified are:
1. Does RCW 60.40.010 (Washington's attorney lien statute) allow an attorney to file a lien on the real property of his client?
2. Can an attorney recover fees, based on a contingency fee agreement if, prior to full completion of the contingency, the attorney ceases to render the required legal services for his client?
3. Can an attorney recover any fees if the attorney has acted unethically in the course of providing the services for which the fees are claimed due?
*600We answer the first two questions…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Fillmore v. WellsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1887
- Ramey v. GravesWashington Supreme Court · 1920
- Humphrey v. BrowningIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
- AAC CORPORATION v. ReedWashington Supreme Court · 1968
- Dailey v. TestoneWashington Supreme Court · 1967
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- Eriks v. DenverWashington Supreme Court · 1992
- Barr v. DayWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- Garrick v. WeaverCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1989
- West v. Thurston CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
- In re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against VanDerbeekWashington Supreme Court · 2004
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.