Legal Opinion

McNeary v. American Cyanamid Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 16, 1986No. 51146-2PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtUtter, J.

This case arises from a dispute between two law firms over division of a contingent fee paid for their successful efforts on behalf of Kay McNeary in a personal injury case. Although the two law firms entered into a retainer agreement intending to divide the work and the fee equally, one firm tried the case and performed almost all of the work necessary for trial. The Seattle firm of Daniel F. Sullivan appeals from a trial court ruling declaring the fee agreement voidable under CPR DR 2-107 and awarding his law firm 60 percent of the fee; the Minneapolis law firm of Kantor & Rubin…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Bowers v. Transamerica Title InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Oberman v. ReillyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
  3. Redford v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Kimball v. Public Utility District No. 1Washington Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Belli v. ShawWashington Supreme Court · 1983

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Tom E. MacUrdy v. Sikov & Love, P.A.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
  2. Daynard v. Ness, Motley, Loadholt, Richardson & Poole, P.A.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2001
  3. In Re HallauerCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1986
  4. Matter of Estate of BrandonAlaska Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Nickerson v. HollowayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1996

4 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