Legal Opinion

Curtis v. Fabianich

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided May 14, 1964No. 3451PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

QUINN, Associate Judge.

Appellant, an attorney, brought suit for professional services rendered appellee. At the close of all the evidence the trial court found that appellant had failed to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, either an express contract for compensation or circumstances warranting recovery in quantum meruit. This appeal followed.

The disputed claim involved a motion for a new trial which appellant agreed to prepare in a case involving appellee’s brother and sister-in-law. Both had been convicted of felonies in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Spilker v. HankinCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1951

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Griffin v. RainerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API