Hurlbert v. Brigham
Supreme Court of Vermont
General Assumpsit. Heard on the report of a referee, April Term, 1881, Lamoille County, Boss, J., presiding. Plea, the general issue. Judgment pro forma for the plaintiff to recover $312.19. No question was made but the charges of the defendants were reasonable. They were such as are usually made by lawyers for professional services; and were made while attending to several different suits.
Read the full summary
General Assumpsit. Heard on the report of a referee, April Term, 1881, Lamoille County, Boss, J., presiding. Plea, the general issue. Judgment pro forma for the plaintiff to recover $312.19. No question was made but the charges of the defendants were reasonable. They were such as are usually made by lawyers for professional services; and were made while attending to several different suits. The suits were brought in the name of Spaulding Spooner, and his wife, Chloe D. The money in contention was paid to the defendants on a judgment rendered in one of the suits. The referee found in part: “…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Ross, J.
The plaintiff seeks to recover the amount of a judgment recovered in his favor as administrator of the estate of Chloe D. Spooner, which the defendants, attorneys for him and Mrs. Spooner in the suit, collected,-and retained the money. The suit was for the recovery of property which belonged to *370Mrs. Spooner, and was commenced by her while in life, and subsequently prosecuted to judgment by the plaintiff, as administrator of her estate. The defendants were the attorneys who prosecuted that suit to judgment, and who had also been employed in…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- In Re PaschalSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- President of the Michigan State Bank v. HastingsMichigan Supreme Court · 1844
- President of Grafton Bank v. DoeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1847
- Richmond v. AikenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1853
- Walker, Smith & Co. v. BaxterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Prichard v. FulmerNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1916
- Cones v. BrooksNebraska Supreme Court · 1900
- State v. LucasOregon Supreme Court · 1893
- Gottstein v. HarringtonWashington Supreme Court · 1901
- Farmers & Merchants Insurance v. DobneyNebraska Supreme Court · 1901
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.