Weekley, Et Vir. v. Knight
Supreme Court of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Curiam.
We have been very much impressed by the plaintiffs in error’s contentions in regard to the order sustaining demurrer to the defendants’ amended first and second pleas to the entire declaration. We think there can be no question that one has a cause of action ex contractu against an attorney who neglects to perform the services which he agrees to perform for a client or which by implication he agrees to perform when he accepts employment by a client. See 6 C. J. 708, Sec. 253; 2 R. C. L. 1012, et seq.; Pennington, Executor, v. Yell, 6 Ark. 212; Chitty on Pleading, Vol. 1, page 149,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pennington's Exrs. v. YellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1850
- Stimpson v. SpragueSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1830
3Cited by18 opinions
- Steele v. KehoeSupreme Court of Florida · 1999
- Gay v. HellerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1958
- Crosby v. JonesSupreme Court of Florida · 1998
- Lenahan v. RUSSELL L. FORKEY, PADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997
- Beck v. Barnett National Bank of JacksonvilleDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1960
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.