Legal Opinion

Denton v. Smith

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 23, 1951No. Civ. 4169PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMussell, J.

Plaintiff, an attorney at law, filed the instant action for the sum of $1,361.56 alleged to be due him for legal services rendered to the defendant in connection with “determining the extent of and recovering the interest of the defendant” in and to the estate of his deceased wife. In addition to the above amount, plaintiff asked for reasonable attorney’s fees in the instant action, interest and costs.

The trial court concluded that the contract sued upon was without consideration, invalid and unenforeible and judgment was rendered that plaintiff recover nothing by reason of the said contract.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Morgan Clark v. MillsapCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Estate of De BarryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  3. Moore v. HoarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  4. Neighbours v. RittenhouseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  5. McNeal v. ForemanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Goldstein v. LeesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  2. Ferrara v. La SalaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. Remainders, Inc. v. BartlettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  4. Walton v. BroglioCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  5. Blythe v. County of Riverside CA4/2California Court of Appeal · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API