Dennison v. Lawrence
New York Supreme Court
The action was by the plaintiff as an attorney to recover $1,000 for professional services rendered under the following special contract: .'“We hereby retain and employ James A. Dennison, Esq., counsellor-at-law, to take such proceedings as to him may seem best to test the validity of the will of James W. Lawrence, and in consideration of his services rendered and to be rendered therein, we hereby promise and agree to pay to the said James A. Dennison, the sum of $3,000,…
Read the full summary
The action was by the plaintiff as an attorney to recover $1,000 for professional services rendered under the following special contract: .'“We hereby retain and employ James A. Dennison, Esq., counsellor-at-law, to take such proceedings as to him may seem best to test the validity of the will of James W. Lawrence, and in consideration of his services rendered and to be rendered therein, we hereby promise and agree to pay to the said James A. Dennison, the sum of $3,000, being $1,000 for each of'us, of the money in any, manner obtained and recovered, it being understood and agreed that said…
1Opinion of the CourtMcAdam, J.
The plaintiff was retained as an attorney to test the . validity of the will of James W. Lawrence, under a special contract by which he was to have $1,.000 from the defendant if he succeeded. This -meant that if he established the invalidity of -the entire will, .so far as it assumed to dispose-of the testator’s estate, and prevent its descent as in case of intestacy, he would earn his fee; otherwise not. The theory of the complaint, drawn by the plaintiff under his contract, shows this-purpose, for he claimed that the entire will was invalid, and that .the executor was bound to account, as…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Brown v. RichterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- Brown v. RichterNew York Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dennison v. LawrenceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900