Legal Opinion
Boller v. Signal Oil & Gas Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 16, 1964No. Civ. 28248PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKingsley, J.
Plaintiff was retained by defendant to prosecute an appeal from an unfavorable judgment rendered by the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County. After successful completion of the ease, a dispute arose over the amount of his fee and, the parties being unable to reach agreement, the present action resulted. For reasons hereinafter set forth, we conclude that the trial court applied erroneous standards and, as a result, arrived at a fee for plaintiff’s services so far below a proper fee as to amount to an abuse of its discretion.
At the time he was retained by defendant, plaintiff had practiced…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Berry v. ChaplinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- City of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles-Inyo Farms Co.California Court of Appeal · 1933
- Freese v. PennieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Hurst v. HurstCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- McConnell v. ALL-COVERAGE INS. EXCH. AUTOMOBILE AND FIRECalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Fed-Mart Corp. v. Pell Enterprises, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1980
- All-West Design, Inc. v. BoozerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- Shannon v. Northern Counties Title InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- Iverson v. Spang Industries, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1975
- Heidt v. Miller Heating & Air Conditioning Co.California Court of Appeal · 1969
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.