Legal Opinion

Harlan v. Lambert

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 28, 1912No. Civ. No. 925PublishedCited by 2 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.

The appeal is on the judgment-roll from a judgment against Dennie May Lambert for the sum of $500: A reversal is sought upon the sole ground that the court failed to find upon the issue of payment. The action was brought to recover the reasonable value of legal services performed by plaintiff for appellant at her special instance and request. The court found that the value of the services was $650, but it is the contention of appellant that as to nonpayment the court found simply that $150 had been paid and that there is no finding that the remainder of the sum had not been paid.

It will not…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Warren v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Frisch v. CalerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
  3. Millard v. Supreme Council of American Legion of HonorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Penrose v. WinterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Jessen v. Peterson, Nelson & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1912

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Holmes v. AndersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  2. Cross v. ThieleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921

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

Powered by the Exa API