Capital Trust Co. v. Calhoun
Supreme Court of the United States
EEEOE TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF .. KENTUCKY. The case is stated in the opinion. It is maintained by defendant in error that the provisions of § 4, of the Act of March 4, 1915, denying his right to collect from his former client the full compensation due under a valid contract, for his professional services rendered prior to the enactment, and making him liable to punishment for a misdemeanor in event he either compels or accepts compliance with the terms of…
Read the full summary
EEEOE TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF .. KENTUCKY. The case is stated in the opinion. It is maintained by defendant in error that the provisions of § 4, of the Act of March 4, 1915, denying his right to collect from his former client the full compensation due under a valid contract, for his professional services rendered prior to the enactment, and making him liable to punishment for a misdemeanor in event he either compels or accepts compliance with the terms of such valid contract, axe in direct derogation of his rights under the Fifth Amendment, in that the statute attempts to…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice McKenna
Proceeding in equity under the law of Kentucky for an accounting from the Capital. Trust Company as administrator de bonis non of the estate of T;hómas N. Arnold, deceased, and that the estate be settled and distributed.
Defendant in error Calhoun and Calhoun & Sizer, a firm composed of C. C. Calhoun and Adrian Sizer, attorneys at law, appeared in the proceeding and by cross-petition prayed judgment against the. trust company as such administrator for the sum of $1504.50, with interest from July 10, 1915. ■ '
An outline of the facts is as follows: Thomas N. Arnold, prior to his death, believing…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Frisbie v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- McGowan v. ParishSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Nutt v. KnutSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Taylor v. BemissSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Ball v. HalsellSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Nebbia v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Calhoun v. MassieSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- O'CONNELL v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
- Noble v. Mead-Morrison Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- Hollister v. UlviSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.