Legal Opinion · Dissent

Jones v. Thomas

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided July 20, 1921No. 20727Published

■Appeal from the district court for Seward uoünty: EdwArd E. Good and George F. Corcoran, Judges.

1DissentAldrich, J.

•The issue involved in this case is whether or not the contract btweeu the attorneys was an entire contract requiring full services to be rendered by an attorney in. order to entitle him to recover anything for services done and performed. From the nature of the case the contract foiqservices was-entire and the fees were contingent.

It appears that the firm of Norval Brothers abandoned ihe case and rendered no service after April, 1911. Their duties devolved upon Mr. Thomas and Mr. Burr. The issue presented is whether or not Norval Brothers are entitled to recover any fees after having…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Norris v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. Holmes v. . EvansNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  3. Morris v. WibauxIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Pollak v. Brush Electric Ass'n of St. LouisSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  5. Huyett & Smith Manufacturing Co. v. Chicago Edison Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1897

15 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