Legal Opinion

Cox v. Trousdale

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided December 9, 1933No. 31,344PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Dawson, J.:

This was an action to recover an attorney’s fee for professional services. Defendant prevailed, and plaintiff appeals.

The facts giving rise to this action may be summarized thus:

The late Thomas A. Noftzger, Esquire, was the head of a firm of lawyers in Wichita for a number of years and so continued until his death in 1931. The plaintiff George W. Cox became his partner in 1914. In 1919 the defendant Walter J. Trousdale became a client of the law firm of Noftzger & Cox. Trousdale had various business activities in which he required the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Martin v. . CampNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Dohner v. Winfield Wholesale Grocery Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1924
  3. Trousdale v. AmermanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1927
  4. Devlin v. City of PleasantonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1930
  5. Platts v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1928

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Rogers v. Williams, Larson, Voss, Strobel & EstesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1989
  2. Kirwin v. McIntoshSupreme Court of Kansas · 1941
  3. Manhardt v. Estate of SheridanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API