Boothe v. Rise

Defendant Rise, a former client of plaintiff, appeals from a judgment awarding plaintiff $18,000 plus interest and disbursements.1 Rise argues that the trial court erred by construing the parties’ contingent fee agreement to mean that plaintiff is entitled to 45% of the value of the fee simple interest in certain real property (“Reedway residence”) owned by Rise and, as a result, by awarding plaintiff more damages than he is entitled to.2

Plaintiff represented Rise in an action on a claim that Rise had a possessory life estate in the Reedway residence occupied by Steckel and for damages equal…