Legal Opinion

Martin v. Reavis

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1928No. 25957PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGood, J.

This is an action to recover from defendants, who are attorneys at law, $1,666.66, which it is alleged belongs to plaintiffs and is wrongfully withheld by defendants;' also to recover, as a penalty, thrice the amount retained, on the theory that it was procured by deceit practiced by the defendants. Defendants admit the retention of the $1,666.66; assert that it was due them as attorney’s fees under a written contract of employment as attorneys for plaintiffs, and deny that any deceit was practiced. On a trial of the issues, after all the testimony was taken, a verdict was directed for…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Meyer v. ShameNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Western Manufacturing Co. v. RogersNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Clark v. HallNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Ricketts v. RogersNebraska Supreme Court · 1898

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Olds v. JamisonNebraska Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Mecham v. ColbyNebraska Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Washington Heights Co. v. FrazierNebraska Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Elk City Cotton Oil Co. v. State Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
  5. Plummer v. FieNebraska Supreme Court · 1958

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API