Anderson v. Eaton
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWaste, C. J.
The complaint in this action for attorney’s fees contains two counts. The first count sets forth a written contract providing for the payment of a one-third contingent fee and the second, a common count, asks for the reasonable value of services performed. No evidence was introduced in support of the latter count, and we therefore dismiss it from consideration. In conformity with the allegations of defendant’s affirmative defense, the trial court found that the contract set out in count one had been procured by fraud, and that it was against public policy and void. Judgment was thereupon…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- In re CowderyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- In re BooneU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California · 1897
- Strong v. International Building Loan & Invest. UnionIllinois Supreme Court · 1899
3Cited by85 opinions
- Goodman v. KennedyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- People Ex Rel. Deparment of Corporations. v. Speedee Oil Change Systems, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1999
- Friedman v. DozorcMichigan Supreme Court · 1981
- Flatt v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- United States v. Standard Oil CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1955
80 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.