Fracasse v. Brent
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BURKE, J.
In this case we are asked to reconsider the rule of damages which allows an attorney who has been discharged without cause by his client to recover as damages the full fee specified in the contract of employment, regardless of the reasonable value of his services or the extent of work performed under that contract. For the reasons hereinafter stated, we have concluded that this rule is inconsistent with the strong policy, expressed both judicially and legislatively, in favor of the client’s absolute right to discharge his attorney at any time, and that the attorney should be…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Martin v. . CampNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Herron v. State Farm Mutual InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- McCracken v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance v. KinslerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Denio v. City of Huntington BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by240 opinions
- Moncharsh v. Heily & BlaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Saucier v. Hayes Dairy Products, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1979
- Rosenberg v. LevinSupreme Court of Florida · 1982
- Rhoades v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1979
- In Re Estate of CallahanIllinois Supreme Court · 1991
235 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.