Legal Opinion

Ambrose v. McDonald

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1878No. 5561PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, San Francisco. The action was brought to recover six hundred and forty-three dollars, as balance due upon stock transactions in September, 1874. The answer admitted the transactions, but set up a counter-claim, and pleaded payment in full upon an accounting and settlement.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, San Francisco. The action was brought to recover six hundred and forty-three dollars, as balance due upon stock transactions in September, 1874. The answer admitted the transactions, but set up a counter-claim, and pleaded payment in full upon an accounting and settlement. The Court found that in December, 1874, the defendant had settled with one Morgan, then the attorney of plaintiff, paying three hundred and eleven dollars in full of all demands. The Court also found that the plaintiff had employed Morgan as an attorney to…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court :

The Court finds that Morgan was employed by plaintiff as an attorney to collect the money due from defendant to him, and that plaintiff restricted his employment to the bringing of a suit against defendant to recover such money.

There is no evidence nor finding of fact that Morgan was represented by the plaintiff as having any relation to him except as his “ lawyer.” As attorney at law he had no authority, actual or ostensible, to compromise the claim or receive any money thereon until after suit brought. (Code of Civil Procedure, sec. 283.)

Judgment and order reversed, and cause…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Inc. Town of Wainwright v. Eureka Fire Hose Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
  2. Borges v. Home Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1966
  3. Borges v. Home Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1966
  4. Elizabeth Cruz and Hilarino Aparicio v. City of San Diego, et al.District Court, S.D. California · 2026
  5. Hernlund v. Town & Country Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1924

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API