Ramey v. Graves
| Decision Date | 06 August 1920 |
| Docket Number | 15738. |
| Citation | 112 Wash. 88,191 P. 801 |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Parties | RAMEY v. GRAVES et al. |
Department 1.
Appeal from Superior Court, King County; A. W. Frater, Judge.
Action by H. M. Ramey, Jr., against Clifford Graves, a minor, and W I. Graves as guardian of his person and estate. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Geo. H. Rummens, of Seattle, for appellants.
H. M Ramey, Jr., and J. Speed Smith, both of Seattle, for respondent.
By this action the plaintiff seeks to recover upon a contract for services rendered as an attorney. The cause was tried to the court without a jury, and resulted in findings of fact conclusions of law, and judgment sustaining the right to recover in the sum of $2,000. From this judgment the defendants appeal. The respondent is an attorney at law practicing his profession at Seattle, Wash. The appellant, W. I. Graves, is the guardian of the person and estate of Clifford Graves, a minor. On or about October 30, 1915, the father, mother, and a brother of Clifford Graves were injured in a railway accident at or near Sand Point, Idaho. All of them died as a result of such injury. The parents of Clifford Graves prior to their decease were residents of the city of Seattle. On November 8, 1915, W. I. Graves, in King county, Wash., was duly and regularly appointed guardian ad litem for Clifford Graves for the purpose of prosecuting an action or actions against the Northern Pacific Railway Company. On the day following he was appointed special administrator of the estate of Minor Graves and Clara Graves, the deceased parents of Clifford Graves. On the 10th day of November, W. I. Graves, in his own behalf, and as guardian ad litem for Clifford Graves, a minor and special administrator of the estates of Minor Graves and Clara Graves, deceased, entered into a written contract with the respondent, by which he was employed to prosecute an action against the railway company. The fee which the respondent was to receive by this contract was to be contingent upon a recovery, or a settlement. Subsequently Graves was appointed guardian of the person and estate of Chifford Graves, a minor in King county, Wash. Prior to the time that the respondent had instituted an action which was contemplated by the contract, the maternal grandfather, residing at Portland, began an action as guardian ad litem in the state of Idaho for the purpose of recovering from the railroad company damages for the death of Clifford Graves' parents. In this action the maternal grandfather was represented by attorneys other than the respondent. After the action had been begun W. I. Graves, being represented by the respondent, was appointed in the state of Idaho guardian of the person and estate of Clifford Graves, a minor, and in this capacity filed a petition in the action then pending in the state of Idaho, asking that he be substituted as party plaintiff, and that the respondent be substituted as an attorney in the action. While this petition was pending, and before it had been determined, W. I. Graves discharged the respondent, and refused to permit him to proceed further under the contract. The action in the state of Idaho proceeded to trial and judgment. After the respondent had been discharged, W. I. Graves, the guardian, consented that the petition which he had filed in the action should be dismissed. The amount of recovery in the Idaho action was $12,000. The contract sued upon in this case provided that in the event of recovery in an action respondent was to be entitled to 50 per cent. of the judgment. This action was instituted for the purpose of recovery upon the contract.
The respondent claims that, after W. I. Graves was appointed guardian of the person of the estate of Clifford Graves for the state of Washington, he in that capacity ratified the contract. It will be assumed, but not decided,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Succession of Wallace, 90-CC-0159
...457 (1957); Cole v. Meyers, 128 Conn. 223, 21 A.2d 396 (1941); First Nat'l Bank v. Bassett, 183 Okla. 592, 83 P.2d 837; Ramey v. Graves, 112 Wash. 88, 191 P. 801 (1920); Martin v. Camp, 219 N.Y. 170, 114 N.E. 46 (1916); Louque v. Dejan, 129 La. 519, 56 So. 427 (1911); See Saucier v. Hayes D......
-
Saucier v. Hayes Dairy Products, Inc.
...Cole v. Myers, 128 Conn. 223, 21 A.2d 396 (1941); First Nat'l. Bank v. Bassett, 83 Okl. 592, 83 P.2d 837 (1938); Ramey v. Graves, 112 Wash. 88, 191 P. 801 (1920); Martin v. Camp, 219 N.Y. 170, 114 N.E. 46 To allow an attorney to acquire, without providing commensurate legal services, an ass......
-
Succession of Jenkins
...Cole v. Myers, 128 Conn. 223, 21 A.2d 396 (1941); First Nat'l Bank v. Bassett, 83 Okl. 592, 83 P.2d 837 (1938); Ramey v. Graves, 112 Wash. 88, 191 P. 801 (1920); Martin v. Camp, 219 N.Y. 170, 114 N.E. 46 To allow a testator to make a binding designation of an attorney to serve others after ......
-
Sohn v. Brockington
...to quantum meruit. See annot., 136 A.L.R. at 254. E. g., Martin v. Camp, 219 N.Y. 170, 114 N.E. 46 (N.Y.1916); Ramey v. Graves, 112 Wash. 88, 191 P. 801 (1920); Fracasse v. Brent, 6 Cal.3d 784, 100 Cal.Rptr. 385, 494 P.2d 9 (1972); Johnson v. Long, 15 Ill.App.3d 506, 305 N.E.2d 30 (1973); I......
-
Table of Cases
...Law Grp. v. Defoor, 176 Wn. App. 210, 308 P.3d 767 (2013), review denied, 179 Wn.2d 1011 (2014): 1.2(3), 3.3(3), 11.4(1) Ramey v. Graves, 112 Wash. 88, 191 P. 801 (1920): 3.5(2) [Page TC-8] Reiter v. Wallgren, 28 Wn.2d 872, 184 P.2d 571 (1947): 13.3(3)(a) Reznick v. Livengood, Alskog, PLLC,......
-
§9.1 Fees
...v. Day, 124 Wn.2d 318, 329, 879 P.2d 912 (1994) (citing Ross v. Scannell, 97 Wn.2d 598, 608-09, 647 P.2d 1004 (1982), and Ramey v. Graves, 112 Wash. 88, 91, 191 P. 801 (1920)). Therefore, a provision in a contingent fee agreement that purports to grant a contingent fee to a discharged lawye......
-
Table of Cases
...102 Ariz. 127, 426 P.2d 395 (1967) . . . . . . . . 64.03[3] Ramer; State v., 151 Wn.2d 106, 86 P.3d 132 (2004) 77.03 Ramey v. Graves, 112 Wash. 88, 191 P. 801 (1920) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.05[2] Ramstead v. Hauge, 73 Wn.2d 162, 437 P.2d 402 (1968) . . . . . . . . . . ......
-
Table of Cases
...118 Wn.2d 1028 (1992): 1–8; 1–8 n.46 R____________________________________________________________________________ Ramey v. Graves, 112 Wash. 88, 191 P. 801 (1920): 9–15 n.88 Ramsey v. Mading, 36 Wn.2d 303, 217 P.2d 1041 (1950): 6–71 n.412 Reinertsen v. Rygg, 139 Wn.App. 1045, No. 55842-1-I......