Legal Opinion

Maiullo v. Genematas

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided February 27, 1969No. Docket 4,061PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant appeals a judgment in plaintiffs’ favor following a trial without a jury. The plaintiffs, attorneys at law, sued the defendant under one count for breach of a contingent fee agreement and under a separate count for $1,500 allegedly unpaid on a prior bill rendered in 1954. The contingent fee agreement was alleged to have been entered into orally with the defendant William Genematas, surviving director of State-Parkview Creamery Company, of which corporation’s capital stock defendant’s father Nicholas Genematas owned 89.523% and the estate of his deceased uncle George Genematas owned…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Wooldridge v. BradburyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
  2. Mackey v. Passaic Stone Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1943
  3. Underwood v. RichCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
  4. Payne v. Davis CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
  5. Roper v. Alamosa National BankSupreme Court of Colorado · 1922

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Camden National Bank v. Steamship Navigation Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2010
  2. Wistrand v. BeseMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970
  3. Henslee, Monek & Henslee v. D.M. Central Transportation, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1994
  4. Camden National Bank v. Steamship Navigation Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2010
  5. Camden National Bank v. Steamship Navigation Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API