Bartlett v. Odd FelLows' Savings Bank
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Foote, C.
This action was brought by an attorney at law to recover a sum of money alleged to be due him by the defendant. Judgment passed for the plaintiff as prayed for, from which, and an order denying a new trial, the defendant appeals.
The points made for the reversal of the judgment and order are: —
1. That the facts set up in the complaint show that the action was not brought to recover compensation for services rendered as an attorney, but that the cause of action is founded upon a breach of contract by the defendant, and arose when the relation of attorney and client was terminated, and…
2Cited by43 opinions
- Fracasse v. BrentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Martin v. . CampNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Landsing Diversified Properties-II v. First National Bank & Trust Co. (In re Western Real Estate Fund, Inc.)Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
- Hulen v. StuartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Denio v. City of Huntington BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.