Legal Opinion
Markwardt v. Zurich American Insurance
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Decided September 12, 2006No. 2004AP3236, 2005AP1292, 2005AP1856, 2005AP1857, 2005AP2543PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKessler, J.
¶ 1. Because each trial judge assigned to one of these cases properly determined that Cannon & Dunphy, S.C. had a valid attorney lien, and based on undisputed material facts determined that attorney fees and costs requested by Cannon & Dunphy, S.C. were reasonable, we affirm. In each case, the award of reasonable attorney fees and costs was consistent with a Retainer Contract signed by each client with Cannon & Dunphy, S.C., and was consistent with the Separation Agreement between Cannon & Dunphy, S.C. and James Gende, who became successor counsel when he ceased to be a Cannon & Dunphy, S.C.…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Gross v. HoffmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
- Standard Theatres, Inc. v. State, Department of TransportationWisconsin Supreme Court · 1984
- Wisconsin Label Corp. v. Northbrook Property & Casualty InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. CastilloWisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
- Herro, McAndrews & Porter, S. C. v. GerhardtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- David J. Rosecky v. Monica M. SchisselWisconsin Supreme Court · 2013
- Southeast Wisconsin Professional Baseball Park District v. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2007
- SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN v. MitsubishiCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2007
- Lorge v. RABLCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2008
- Abdou v. WalkerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2021
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.