Legal Opinion

Vanderveer v. Hillman

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 2, 1923No. 17325PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolcomb, J.

-This action is for an attorney’s fee of $10,000, alleged to have been due for legal services of that value rendered by George F. Vanderveer, former husband of respondent, who was substituted as plaintiff before trial.

The services were alleged to have been performed by Vanderveer, the husband, in very important litigation against the appellants in the state of California.

It is alleged that Vanderveer went to California for the purpose of performing such professional services, and remained there from October 29 to November 12, *6851920, devoting himself to the preparation of the eases, and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Schramm v. SteeleWashington Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Day v. HenryWashington Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Taylor v. Modern Woodmen of AmericaWashington Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Brotton v. LangertWashington Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Wilson v. StoneWashington Supreme Court · 1916

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Koppang v. SevierMontana Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Dehoney v. GjardeWashington Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Seth v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Bank of Washington v. Hilltop Shakemill, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1980
  5. State v. McWhinneyWashington Supreme Court · 1945

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