Legal Opinion
McMahon v. Merrill
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 29, 1952No. Civ. 18882PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDrapeau, J.
Plaintiff is an attorney at law. He sued defendant for $2,046.75 for legal services. Defendant denied the claim and cross-complained for $9,665.80 for professional malpractice of plaintiff.
Much of the background of this case is to be found in the reported decisions in McMahon v. Superior Court, 29 Cal.2d 515 [175 P.2d 817]; Estate of Merrill, 29 Cal.2d 520 [175 P.2d 819]; Estate of Merrill, 81 Cal.App.2d 102 [183 P.2d 300]; and Estate of Merrill, 89 Cal.App.2d 826 [202 P.2d 123].)
In those cases plaintiff sought unsuccessfully to have adjudged as proper, fees which he claimed as attorney for…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Estate of MerrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Reeves v. ReevesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- E. Clemens Horst Co. v. New Blue Point Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1918
- Helvey v. Security-First Nat. Bank of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Miller v. LantzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Woolford v. DenbowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Baldwin v. BaldwinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Pfleg v. PflegCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Garcia v. First Metropolitan Mortgage CA2/2California Court of Appeal · 2020