Legal Opinion

Matthiesen v. Smith

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 16, 1936No. Civ. 10140PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTyler, P. J.

Action to recover the reasonable value of legal services. The services were rendered by plaintiff’s assignors, McKinstry, Haber & Coombes, practicing attorneys in San Francisco, in bringing suit and collecting in full both principal and interest on six promissory 'notes in the amount of $171,358.08, the payment of which had been refused by the maker on demand of the payee for whom plaintiff’s assignors instituted suit. The case was tried before a jury which awarded plaintiff the sum of $12,500, inclusive of court costs of $74.83 which had been paid by defendant on demand, leaving a balance of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Howland v. Oakland Consolidated Street Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
  2. McCollum v. BarrCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
  3. Grass v. Rindge Co.California Court of Appeal · 1927
  4. Reardon v. Richmond Land Co.California Court of Appeal · 1913
  5. Stuart v. PrestonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Schwartz v. SchwerinArizona Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Mardirossian & Associates, Inc. v. ErsoffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  3. Waller v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Crevolin v. CrevolinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  5. Ries v. ReinardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

2 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