Lake v. Winfield Fuller Co., 7503.
| Decision Date | 22 June 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 7503.,7503. |
| Citation | 173 A. 119 |
| Parties | LAKE v. WINFIELD FULLER CO. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Exceptions from Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties; Herbert L. Carpenter, Judge.
Action of assumpsit by Alfred H. Lake against the Winfield Fuller Company. Decision for plaintiff, and defendant brings exception.
Exception overruled, and case remitted, with directions.
Samuel H. Workman and Alfred H. Lake, both of Providence, for plaintiff.
Henry M. Boss, Jr., and Herbert Tiemann, both of Providence, for defendant.
This is an action of assumpsit brought by the plaintiff, an attorney at law, to recover for his disbursements and for professional services rendered to defendant in an action at law brought by the defendant against one Charles T. Toomey. The ad damnum of the writ was $500. The action was tried by a justice of the superior court sitting without a jury. The decision was for the plaintiff for $412.55. The case is here on the defendant's exception to the decision.
The facts are not in dispute. Defendant corporation conducts an insurance business in Providence which is owned and managed by its president, one Winfield Fuller. Toomey was indebted to defendant for commissions on insurance policies which he had collected during a period of several years, and also for rent, telephone service, gasoline, traveling expenses, etc. Defendant was indebted to Toomey for some commissions due on certain premiums collected by him. The plaintiff was employed by Fuller to bring suit against Toomey, and was instructed to "go against him hard." Nothing was said by either party about plaintiff's fee.
Plaintiff brought an action in assumpsit promptly and attached Toomey's property. This attachment was released by the delivery to the officer of a statutory bond in the penal sum of the ad damnum of the writ. Plaintiff had numerous interviews with Toomey's attorney, and, as a result of an informal accounting made by the two attorneys, the claim of the defendant which was originally for $2,800 was finally determined to be $2,146.89, exclusive of interest. This amount appears to have been accepted by both parties as correct. Thereafter Toomey offered to settle his indebtedness by the payment of $1,400, which was all the money he was able to secure at the time. This offer was rejected by defendant, and the action was made ready for trial. Shortly before the assignment day of the action, defendant, without cause, discharged plaintiff as his counsel.
The declaration which was originally on book account and the common counts was amended after the entry of the writ in the district court by the addition of a special count in assumpsit. Therein plaintiff alleged that he was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Farkas v. Sadler
...Mitchell, 410 F.Supp. 1278 (W.D.N.C. 1976); Fracasse v. Brent, 6 Cal.3d 784, 100 Cal.Rptr. 385, 494 P.2d 9 (1972); Lake v. Winfield Fuller Co., 54 R.I. 358, 173 A. 119 (1934). Similarly, an attorney may withdraw from the relationship, but then only on the basis of compelling circumstances. ......
-
Church v. McBurney, 85-86-A
...relationship is the product of an agreement of the parties and may be implied from their conduct); Lake v. Winfield Fuller Co., 54 R.I. 358, 360, 173 A. 119, 120 (1934) (client has the right to discharge his attorney at any time, with or without cause, subject to responsibility for the cons......
-
Tarro v. Checrallah
...subject, however, to the responsibility for the consequences of the breach of the contract of employment.” Lake v. Winfield Fuller Co., 54 R.I. 358, 360, 173 A. 119, 120 (1934). Moreover, “[a]fter discharge without cause, the attorney is always entitled to recover an amount based on the rea......
- Bradish v. Sullivan, 7384.