Aiken v. White
This text of 29 S.E.2d 97 (Aiken v. White) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The Supreme Court having reversed the judgment of this court with direction, White v. Aiken, 197 Ga. 29 (28 S. E. 2d, 263), and no other reversible error appearing in the assignments of error not heretofore passed on by this court, the judgment of this court is vacated *538 and'the judgment of the tidal court is affirmed with the following direction as directed by the judgment of the Supreme Court: “When the remittitur is received, before the trial court makes the judgment of this court its judgment, the trial court shall determine whether Mr. Aiken has already received reasonable compensation for his services rendered to his client, and if so, that the judgment striking his name from the case as attorney be affirmed. If it should be determined that the amount of fees already paid him is not sufficient in amount to be reasonable compensation for the services rendered by him to the client at the time of his discharge, then the trial court will pass such order as will make Aiken secure for such balance. If in the opinion of the trial judge it be necessary to effectuate this latter purpose, a condition may be placed upon the order striking Aiken’s name from the case.”
Judgment affirmed with direction.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 S.E.2d 97, 70 Ga. App. 537, 1944 Ga. App. LEXIS 41, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aiken-v-white-gactapp-1944.