網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

torney in the course of litigation is required to engage the services of an out-of-town attorney. This out-of-town attorney in due course renders his bill for the services rendered, upon the prior understanding that the forwarding attorney is to receive the customary one-third of the fee. The client could not have procured the services to be rendered by an out-of-town attorney for a less price than the amount charged. Is the forwarding attorney entitled to retain for his own use the share of the fee he receives from his out-of-town corresponding attorney?

2. Under a similar arrangement for the payment of a share of the fee to a forwarding attorney, the latter attorney arranges with his client to conduct the entire litigation, including disbursements, for a fixed amount. In the latter case, would he ethically be entitled to retain the share of the fee which he receives from his out-of-town corresponding attorney and not account for it to the client?

ANSWER No. 180.

1. The Committee reaffirms its opinion that division of fees between attorneys "should be based upon a sharing of professional responsibility or of legal services, and that no such division should be made except with a member of the legal profession associated in the employment as a lawyer. Any other division would appear to be a mere payment for securing professional employment, which is to be condemned." (Question 42.)

All division of fees between attorneys is by agreement, expressed or implied, but as to whether a one-third-two-thirds division is customary outside of the collection business, the Committee expresses no opinion. It is assumed that as the out-of-town attorney was retained in the "course of litigation," the forwarding attor ney shared in the professional responsibility, if not in the actual legal services Upon the above assumptions, in the opinion of the Committee, the receipt of a share of the fee by the forwarding attorney is justifiable as a compensation for services and it may properly be retained by the forwarding attorney for his own use. The client, however, should be advised of the fact that his attorney received part of the fee of the out-oftown attorney.

2. Assuming, as the Committee does, that the client was not over-reached or deceived in fixing the agreed amount, it is not of the opin

ion that the forwarding attorney owes an accounting to his client; but if the arrangement with the client is of a nature which, for his proper enlightenment or to enable him to make a fair contract with his lawyer, requires a disclosure of the actual disbursements, of course, the client should not be deceived or misled by concealment of the division.

The Committee does not understand the question to imply that the forwarding attorney agrees at all events himself to pay the disbursements.

QUESTION No. 183..

Infant; Employment; Compensation; Relation to Client; Relation to Court-Acceptance of Employment at Expense of One Adversely Interested to Act as Attorney in Behalf of Infant to Secure Authority for Settlement and Release of Infant's Claim for Personal Injuries.—A defendant covered by insurance injures an infant plaintiff through the negligent operation of his automobile. The insurance company adjustors immediately make overtures to the infant's parents for settlement, and an amount is agreed upon satisfactory to the parents and the company. Thereupon, the insurance company procures an attorney, not connected with its legal staff but on friendly terms with it, to prepare a petition and order appointing one of the infant's parents guardian ad litem for the proposed infant plaintiff. This the outside attorney takes or sends to the parents of the injured infant for execution. The petition is presented and upon motion of the outside lawyer as attorney for the petitioner, an order appointing the parent guardian ad litem is entered. Next, by arrangement, the attorney for the guardian ad litem delivers a summons to the regular attor ney for the insurance company, who defends the action on behalf of the assured, and this attorney gives a notice of appearance in the action. As soon as the summons and notice of appearance are filed in court and the action is at issue, the outside attorney for the guardian ad litem prepares a petition for leave to compromise the action for the amount of the agreed settlement. An order granting leave to the guardian ad litem is then entered authorizing the guardian ad litem to receive the amount of the settlement upon his executing a bond in the required sum. The fee for this bond is paid by the insurance company. After the money is paid over, and a general release taken from the guardian ad litem, the action is discontinued.

In the opinion of your committee, is such conduct on the part of the outside attorney, whose fee is paid by the insurance company, proper?

ANSWER No. 183.

It does not affirmatively appear by the question that the "outside attorney" makes full disclosure to the Court of his connection with the insurance company. Assuming that there is no such disclosure, the Committee is of opinion that the conduct on the part of the "outside attorney" is highly improper and unprofessional, because in appearing as attorney of record for the plaintiff he represents to the Court that he owes an undivided duty to the infant, whereas in fact he is employed, and is to be paid, by a company whose interest is adverse to that of the infant. (See Matter of Reifschneider, 60 App. Div., 478, Second Department.)

And even if the "outside attorney" does make full disclosure to the Court, still in the opinion of the Committee the practice is not to be commended. The interests of the infant should be represented by independent counsel not biased by such method of employment, whose representation of the infant before the Court should be based upon his independent and unbiased judgment. (See Questions and Answers Nos. 25 and 171.)

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE PROGRESS OF UNIFORM LAWS.

Editor Central Law Journal:

In the December 5th issue of the Journal is an article by James M. Kerr on uniform legisla tion. On pages 409 and 410 he gives a list of the states adopting the various acts. This com pilation was apparently made from an old table and does not show the correct number of adop tions at the present date. I am enclosing herewith a correct list which I hope can appear in the Journal. The variation in the figures is considerable. In all but one instance the number of adoptions which Mr. Kerr states is too small.

He also states on page 410 that Texas has not adopted the Negotiable Instruments Act. The act was adopted in that jurisdiction in 1919. Very truly yours, E. A. GILMORE. Madison, Wis.

NOTE-We are very glad to receive from Mr. Gilmore, who is Secretary of the Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, the correction he notes with respect to Mr. Kerr's article in 89 Cent. L. J. 409. For the information of our readers we give below a list of all the laws prepared by the Conference, and the states in which such uniform laws have been adopted. -Ed.

STATES WHICH HAVE ADOPTED UNIFORM LAWS.

Domestic Acknowledgments Act-Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Tennessee, Alaska, Minnesota; total, 9.

Execution of Wills Act-Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, Utah, Alaska; total, 6.

Probate of Foreign Wills Act-Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Utah, Wisconsin, Alaska, Washington; total, 7.

Promissory Notes, Checks, Drafts and Bills of Exchange (Days of Grace)-Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Philippine Islands; total, 4.

Negotiable Instruments Act-Adopted in all jurisdictions except Georgia and Porto Rico; total, 51.

Migratory Divorce Act-Wisconsin.

Divorce Procedure Act-Delaware, Wisconsin; total, 2.

Sales Act-Arizona, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Alaska; total, 23.

Warehouse Receipts Act-Adopted in all jurisdictions except Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Hawaii; total, 41.

Annulment of Marriage and Divorce ActDelaware, New Jersey, Wisconsin; total, 3.

Bills of Lading Act-California, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mis souri, New Hampshire, New York, North Caro

lina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, Alaska, Philippine Islands; total, 23.

Stock Transfer Act-Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Alaska; total, 14.

Federal Pure Food Law-Kentucky, Louisiana; total, 2.

Family Desertion Act-Alabama, Kansas, North Dakota, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming; total, 11.

Marriage License Act-Massachusetts, Wisconsin; total, 2.

Child Labor Law-Kentucky, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Utah; total, 4.

Marriage Evasion Act-Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Vermont, Wisconsin; total, 5.

Foreign Acknowledgments Act-Louisiana, Maryland, Nevada, New Hampshire, Wisconsin; total, 5.

Partnership Act-Idaho, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Alaska; total, 11.

Cold Storage Act-Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Utah, Wisconsin; total, 6. Workmen's Compensation Act-Idaho, Indiana, Minnesota, Oregon; total, 4.

Foreign Probated Wills Act-Illinois, Louisiana, Nevada, Wisconsin; total, 4.

Land Registration Act-Georgia, Utah, Virginia; total, 3.

Limited Partnership Act-Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Alaska; total, 10.

Act for the Extradition of Persons of Unsound Mind-Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, Tennessee, Wisconsin; total, 7.

Flag Law-Arizona, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Washington, Wisconsin; total, 6.

Fraudulent Conveyance Act-Arizona, Delaware, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, South Dakota, Tennessee, Wisconsin; total, 8. Conditional Sales Act-Arizona, Delaware, New Jersey, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Alaska; total, 6.

HUMOR OF THE LAW.

The latest bit of levity to go the rounds of the lawyers refers to an experience of which Attorney Arthur C. Thomsen was the beneficiary on Wednesday.

Mr. Thomsen held a judgment of $9.50 of long standing against an Italian, to whom he wrote that if the money was not paid he would get the Italian's goat.

The Italian's wife walked into Mr. Thomsen's office with the money, explaining that the family goat supplied the children with milk and that its loss would be a serious blow.

Mr. Thomsen did not know that his debtor owned a goat.-Docket.

One of our Oregon subscribers, Hon. D. C. Lewis, recently spent the morning in an inspection of the State Penitentiary at Salem.

Mr. Lewis became interested in one of the prisoners, a young man of cheery disposition, good manners and apparent intelligence.

"Young man," advised Lewis, after picking up a conversation with him, "as soon as you get out of here the best thing you can do is to settle down, go to work and get hold of a piece of property."

"Shucks, that's what I'm in for," was the

retort.

When looking at men of renown

The lordly financial elect,
Who fill half the people in town
With humble and cringing respect-
We often have wondered a bit

If we still would feel reverent thrills for the shrewdness and sense of these excellent

gents,

If we knew what they had in their wills! -St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

"Why did you turn out for that truck? According to the traffic rules, you had the right of way."

"Yes," answered Mr. Chuggins, patiently, "but the truck had the right of weight."-Washington Star.

Uncle Rastus, testifying in a certain lawsuit, refused to be sworn.

"Ah will affirm," he said.

"But, Uncle Rastus," said the judge, "how is this? Last week, in the Calhoun case, you swore readily enough."

"Yo' honah," said Uncle Rastus solemnly, "Ah was mo' suah o' mah facks in dat case dan in dis one."-Minneapolis Journal.

[blocks in formation]

5. Associations-Common Law.-A voluntary association, being only a collection of individuals, could not, at common law, sue or be sued in its associated name, and, in the absence of an enabling act, suits against such association should be brought against individual members. -Lewelling v. Manufacturing Wood-Workers' Underwriters, Ark., 215 S. W. 258.

6. Attorney and Client-Good Faith.—An attorney, obtaining a deed from his client, has the burden of establishing the perfect fairness and good faith of the transaction and the adequacy of the consideration.-Delasca v. Grimes, Minn., 174 N. W. 523.

.5

7.

..22, 26, 45, 56, 74, 83 .55, 59, 66 .1, 25, 29, 58, 67, 81 .16 12, 31, 41, 52, 61 .3, 15, 28, 40, 46 .48 ..11, 24, 54, 82, 84 .43, 80 .17, 69 49 .30

..6, 27, 35, 42, 79

.37 .36, 64, 68 .65, 70 14, 44, 51 19, 50, 75

..8 .2, 23 ...7, 47 32, 34, 77 13, 20, 71 .4, 9, 18, 78 33, 72 10

.21, 38, 57 .39, 53, 60, 62, 63, 76

[blocks in formation]

Bailment-Bailee for Hire.-A bailee for hire is required to exercise only "ordinary care" in keeping and caring for property deposited with him-that care which a capable and reasonably prudent person, engaged in the same business, is accustomed to exercise.-Dodge v. Nashville, C. & St. L. R. Co., Tenn., 215 S. W. 274.

8. Bankruptcy-Excuse from Testifying. Bankruptcy Act 1898, § 7 (U. S. Comp. St., § 9591), providing that no testimony given by bankrupt shall be offered against him in any criminal proceeding, does not apply to the language and acts of a bankrupt who in the course of his examination upon the witness stand commits a fresh crime, such as perjury or the uttering of a forged instrument.-State v. Frasier, Ore., 184 Pac. 848.

9.Fixtures.-Machinery placed in its lithographing plant by bankrupt under bailments or leases, with an option to purchase, but title reserved in the bailors, held, as against the trustee and creditors, to pass under a mortgage of the plant and machinery therein; the rights of the bailors not being involved.-In re Erie Lithographing Co., U. S. D. C., 260 Fed. 490.

10. Banks and Banking-Double Liability.It is not essential to the enforcement of double liability imposed by law upon bank stockholders that all of the bank's assets be first exhausted, where it is apparent that the bank is insolvent. -Lynch v. Jacobsen, Utah, 184 Pac. 929. 11.

Bastards-Legitimizing.-A child born out of wedlock at a time when the legitimate wife of his father was living is legitimized by marriage of father to mother of such child after death of wife.-Stamper v. Lunsford, Ky., 215 S. W. 297.

12. Bills and Notes-Consideration.-Want of consideration is a valid defense in action between original parties to promissory note or bill of exchange.-Shireman v. Second Nat. Bank of New Albany, Ind., 124 N. E. 712.

13. Champerty and Maintenance Attorney and Client.-Both by the common law and by Rev. Civ. Code Porto Rico 1911, § 1362, a contract by an attorney to conduct a litigation, to pay the costs and expenses, and to receive as compensation a share of the amount recovered, is champertous and invalid.-Sun Life Assur. Co. of Canada v. Casanova, U. S. C. C. A., 260 Fed. 449.

14. Charities-Masses.-Masses are religious ceremonials and come within the religious or pious uses which are upheld as public charities.

-Morris v. Edwards, N. Y., 124 N. E. 724, 227 N. Y. 141.

15.

Chattel Mortgages-After Acquired Property. Subsequently acquired property may be included in a chattel mortgage given to secure an existing indebtedness.-Live Stock Nat. Bank of Sioux City v. Julius, Ia., 174 N. W. 489.

16. Lien.-The purchaser of mortgaged personal property takes the title free from the lien of the mortgage, if the sale was made with the mortgagee's express or implied consent.Adamson v. Moves, Idaho, 184 Pac. 849.

17.Security.-A chattel mortgage being security for a debt the mortgagor has the right to redeem by payment of the debt until the mortgage is legally foreclosed.-Drummond v. Trickey, Me., 108 Atl. 72.

18.

Commerce-Federal Trade Commission.The Federal Trade Commission Act (Comp. St. §§ 8836a-8836k) was enacted by Congress in the exercise of its constitutional power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce.-U. S. v. Basic Products Co., U. S. D. C., 260 Fed. 472.

19. Intrastate Control.-Where automobiles were consigned to corporations within the state and were sold direct by the consignees from their storage warehouses in the state, they were not in interstate commerce after reaching the storage warehouses.-Bethlehem Motors Corporation v. Flynt, N. C., 100 S. E. 693.

20. Conspiracy-Indictment. -An indictment charging that defendants were employes of a firm of contractors for government work, one being in charge of the pay roll; that under the contract the contractors were to be reimbursed for their expenditures and paid a commission as their compensation; that defendants conspired to have one of them, employed as a fireman, placed on the pay roll as an engineer, whereby he would receive a higher rate of pay; and that he was so placed by his codefendant-held sufficient to charge a conspiracy to defraud the United State.-Belvin v. U. S., U. S. C. C. A., 260 Fed. 455.

21. Contracts-Construction.-Where contract contains words of general or indefinite meaning, their meaning will be determined by a consideration of the language and of the conditions and circumstances under which contract was made, and the purpose sought to be accomplished.-Butler v. Carlyle, W. Va., 100 S. E.

736.

22.-Equity. If equity can be done between the parties, the courts will grant relief to the defrauded party, by way of cancellation of a contract, even though the parties cannot be placed exactly in statu quo.-Hegel v. Hannas, Cal., 184 Pac. 898.

23. Illegality.-No action can be based on an illegal contract.-Hinnant v. Southern Ry. Co., S. C., 100 S. E. 709.

24.- -Meeting of Minds.-A contract entered into by one mentally incapable of understanding and appreciating or knowing the effect of the contract was of no effect; there being no meeting of the minds.-Baker v. McDonald, Ky., 215 S. W. 292.

25. Corporations-Corporate Powers.

After

a corporation's contract has been performed by

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

26.- Notice of Assessment.-If plaintiff was a stockholder in defendant company of whom it was bound to take notice as such, his interest in his shares of stock being a joint interest with the original owner of such shares, notice to the original owner of an assessment was notice to him.-Whitcomb v. Giannini, Cal., 184 Pac. 887.

27. Covenants-Impossibility of Performance. -Where plaintiff's deed of premises to defendant, his niece, contemplated that he should have a home with her on the premises and there receive from her care and support, his wrongful act in killing her husband, making it impossible for her to perform, forfeited plaintiff's right to claim performance after his pardon from a life sentence-Hall v. Crook, Minn., 174 N. W. 519.

28. Criminal Law-Accomplice.-In prosecution for larceny of automobile, testimony of accomplice that he intended to return automobile to owner was inadmissible; intention of accomplice being immaterial, and accomplice not being competent to express opinion as to intention of defendant.--State v. Herring, Ia., 174 N. W 495.

29.- -Admission.-An "admission," as applied to criminal cases, is the avowal or acknowledgment of facts or circumstances from which guilt may be inferred, and tending only to prove the offense charged, but not amounting to a confessio nof guilt, and hence broadly distinguished from a confession.-Easterling v. State, Ga., 100 S. E. 727.

30- -Counts in Indictment. - Where the examining magistrate bound over the defendant on charges of assault with intent to rape and also assault growing out of the same transaction and covered by the same testimony, and information charged both offenses in different counts, it was not error for the trial court to permit the prosecutor to elect to try defendant upon the former charge, and the defendant was not put upon trial for a different offense than the one on which he was arrested and examined. People v. Mathews, Mich., 174 N. W. 532. 31. -Grand Jury.-Where one member of the grand jury regularly called was excused and a substitute member at the direction of the court was called by the sheriff from among the bystanders and sworn as a member of the jury, the jury thus organized was irregular and could not return an indictment which would stand when properly attacked, and a plea in abatement setting up the facts should be sustained if disclosing defendant had not by conduct or omission waived the defect.-Smith v. State, Ind., 124 N. E. 698.

32. -Misdemeanor.-In the case of a misdemeanor, as a simple assault, all parties are regarded as principals.-Lewis v. State, Tex., 215 S. W. 303.

33.- -Search and Seizure.-There was neither testimony required of accused nor unreasonable search and seizure in violation of his constitutional rights, where letters written by him while in penitentiary for a prior offense, came into the possession of the penitentiary officials under established practice, and were used against him on the trial.-Stroud v. U. S. U. S. S. C., 40 Sup. Ct. 50.

34. Damages-Mental Suffering. There can be no recovery in favor of a mother on account of mental suffering and anxiety caused by injuries to her child.-Chrone v. Gonzales, Tex., 215 S. W. 368.

35.- -Net Profits.-Where a contract is repudiated after one of the parties has been to an expense in part performance, or in preparing for performance, such expense can be recovered, and also the net profits, if any are proven.Periodical Press Co. V. Sherman-Elliott Minn., 174 N. W. 516.

Co.,

« 上一頁繼續 »