FEINGOLD V. PUCELLO
654 A.2d 1093 (1995)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a suit in quantum meruit.
FACTS: Pucello (D) was involved in an accident and was referenced to Feingold (P)
attorney at law. The two never met but P discussed part of the case with D and the
possibility of P representing D. No fee agreements were ever discussed. P then went to work
on the case and inspected the accident site, took pictures, obtained the police report, and
secured an admission of liability from the other driver. After about a month, P then mailed
D a contingency fee agreement for a 50/50 split. D balked and got other counsel. P told D he
could keep his files on the case. P then sued D in quantum meruit. The courts ruled for D
and P appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment