Legal Opinion · Dissent

Valparaiso Technical Institute, Inc. v. Porter County Treasurer

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided February 27, 1997No. 64A04-9601-CV-9Published

1DissentChezem, Judge

I respectfully dissent. The majority opinion concludes that a contingent fee cannot be imposed upon a third party without prior agreement and that the fee imposed here was unreasonable. I would agree in the context of private matters, where the collection agreement fees are between three willing interests, for instance: lender, borrower, and the collecting attorney. In a matter of delinquent tax collection, other interests are involved: treasurer, collecting attorney, delinquent taxpayer, and timely taxpayer. I decline to follow the Leibowitz, Berkemeier, and Waxman line of cases cited by the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. White v. Porter County TreasurerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API