Legal Opinion

Rowe v. Holmes

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 25, 1944No. Civ. 3244PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment awarding the plaintiff interest on a fee for professional services rendered to the defendants.

The defendants owned certain lands which were condemned and taken for use as a reservoir site in an action filed by the Metropolitan Water District. In 1935, the defendants employed the plaintiff, by a written contract, to render services as a hydraulic engineer in connection with that action. While the plaintiff’s compensation was not contingent upon the outcome of that case, under the terms of the contract, whether it was payable upon the entry of a judgment in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Metropolitan Water District v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Westinghouse Elec. & Mfg. Co. v. ChambersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Cordes v. HardingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
  4. Ferris v. Independence Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1932

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bruno v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
  2. Dunne & Gaston v. KeltnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  3. Dunne & Gaston v. KeltnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API