Cain v. Hockensmith Wheel & Car Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania
On motion to take money out of court.
1Opinion of the Court
ARCHBALD, District Judge.1
The question to be disposed of upon this motion is whether a claim for counsel fees in favor of plaintiff’s attorneys, upon a judgment recovered by them for their client, is to be preferred over a prior attachment levied on the money in the hands of the defendants as garnishees. The facts are not in dispute, and are as follows: On June 25, 1904, the plaintiff, W. A. Cain, having a disputed claim against the Hockensmith Wheel & Car Company for construction work done in the winter and spring of 1903, employed Benjamin H. Thompson, Esq., an attorney at law of Pittsburg,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McKelvy's & Sterrett's AppealsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885
- Patten v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1859
- Gregory v. PikeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1895
- Dubois's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1861
- Patrick v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Fidelity Bank v. Commonwealth Marine & General Assurance Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1984
- German v. Universal Oil Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1935
- Brown v. MorganU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Iowa · 1908
- Fidelity Bank v. Commonwealth Marine & General Assurance Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1984
- Chorosh v. WoodburyNew York Supreme Court · 1930
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.