Legal Opinion
Otten v. San Francisco Hotel Owners Ass'n
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 2, 1946No. Civ. 12909PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDooling, J.
Plaintiff’s assignor is an attorney at law. In 1939 he was retained as the attorney for the defendants pursuant to a resolution adopted by defendants’ labor conciliation committee which read in part: 11 That Mr. Lynch be retained under contract from January 1, 1939 until January 1, 1940, at $250.00 per month and these services include any arbitration that might arise during this period.”
After 1939 plaintiff’s assignor, without any express agreement, continued to act as defendants ’ attorney and was paid for his services regularly at the rate of $250 per month until February, 1942, when he was…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Estate of AppleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- In Re Estate of ElizaldeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Tatterson v. Suffolk Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Associated Indemnity Corp. v. Industrial Accident Commission & SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co. v. BulkleyIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Merritt v. Reserve InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
- Worthington v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- State Ex Rel. Williams v. MusgraveIdaho Supreme Court · 1962
- M.P. Doran, James A. Scott and James H. Bailey, Cross-Appellants v. F.H. Houle and James W. Glosser, Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Hawes Office System Inc. v. Wang Laboratories, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1982
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.