Legal Opinion

Mutter v. Burgess

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided June 23, 1930No. 12,577PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Butler

L. W. Burgess and E. B. Adams, engaged in the prac tiee of law under the firm name of Burgess and Adams, herein called the plaintiffs, sued A. M. Mutter, herein called the defendant, for the balance of a fee claimed to be due them under a contract. They recovered a judgment for $800, the full amount demanded, which judgment Mutter seeks to reverse.

The question presented for our decision concerns the right of lawyers to recover for their services when they withdraw from a case before the full performance of the services they agreed to perform. On March 21,1929, the defendant employed the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. City of Detroit v. WhittemoreMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
  2. State ex rel. Smith v. DrakeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Genrow v. FlynnMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Dorshimer v. HerndonNebraska Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Kikuchi v. RitchieCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1913

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. International Materials Corp. v. Sun Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1992
  2. Olsen and Brown v. City of EnglewoodSupreme Court of Colorado · 1995
  3. Elliott v. JoyceSupreme Court of Colorado · 1994
  4. Olsen and Brown v. City of EnglewoodColorado Court of Appeals · 1994
  5. Joyce v. ElliottColorado Court of Appeals · 1993

3 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