Ackert v. Barker
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract for money had and received. The answer set up that the defendant was an attorney at law, and as such was employed by the plaintiff to collect certain sums of money from certain insurance companies, “ that the plaintiff agreed, in consideration of the defendant acting for him in the premises, that said defendant should, out of any and all moneys received by him from said insurance companies, retain one half of the amount received after payment of proper costs and…
Read the full summary
Contract for money had and received. The answer set up that the defendant was an attorney at law, and as such was employed by the plaintiff to collect certain sums of money from certain insurance companies, “ that the plaintiff agreed, in consideration of the defendant acting for him in the premises, that said defendant should, out of any and all moneys received by him from said insurance companies, retain one half of the amount received after payment of proper costs and charges; ” admitted the receipt of a certain sum from the insurance companies ; and averred that the defendant had the…
1Opinion of the CourtGray, C. J.
The defendant’s answer and bill of exceptions, fairly construed, show that the agreement set up by the defendant was an agreement by which, in consideration that an attorney should prosecute suits in behalf of his client for certain sums of money, in which he had himself no previous interest, it was agreed that he should keep one half of the amount recovered in case of success, and should receive nothing for his services in case of failure.
By the law of England from ancient times to the present day, such an agreement is unlawful and void, for champerty and maintenance, as contrary to public…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Swett v. PoorMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Best v. StrongNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Scott v. HarmonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
3Cited by21 opinions
- Roller v. MurraySupreme Court of Virginia · 1911
- Baskin v. PassMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
- Blaisdell v. AhernMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Sherwin-Williams Co. v. J. Mannos & Sons, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Hadlock v. BrooksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.