Legal Opinion

Parker v. Fryberger

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 31, 1925No. 24,676PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.

Defendant, an attorney, had contracts with about 260 clients who were stockholders and noteholders of an electric traction company, known as the “Dan Patch Line,” to represent them on a contingent fee of 50 per cent of the amount to be recovered. Several actions were instituted resulting in a settlement, defendant receiving $16, 800 as fees.

This is an action to recover for services pursuant to an alleged express contract. The complaint clearly states a cause of action upon a contract of employment to secure evidence and information desired and needed for the successful prosecution of such…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Holland v. SheehanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  2. Bank of Willmar v. LawlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
  3. Valerius v. RichardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
  4. Kies v. SearlesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
  5. American Engine Co. v. CrowleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Dwyer v. Illinois Oil Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
  2. Trovatten v. HansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  3. First National Bank v. FoxSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
  4. Kingsley v. AldenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
  5. State Ex Rel. Weiss v. MoriartySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938

10 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