Ida J. Rogers, Appellees-Plaintiffs v. Rodney J. Edwards and James R. Fitzharris, Appellants-Defendants

Eighth Circuit

Ida J. Rogers, Appellees-Plaintiffs v. Rodney J. Edwards and James R. Fitzharris, Appellants-Defendants

547 F.2d 1056, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 10513

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 17, 1977

Docket76-1553

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 547 F.2d 1056 (Ida J. Rogers, Appellees-Plaintiffs v. Rodney J. Edwards and James R. Fitzharris, Appellants-Defendants) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ida J. Rogers, Appellees-Plaintiffs v. Rodney J. Edwards and James R. Fitzharris, Appellants-Defendants, 547 F.2d 1056, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 10513 (8th Cir. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This suit was brought by the heirs of two deceased lawyers seeking a declaration relating to attorneys’ fees following successful prosecution of claims before the Indian Claims Commission. The defendants are two attorneys who were parties to a fee sharing contract with the plaintiffs’ decedents. The suit involves a construction of this contract. The district court found in favor of the plaintiffs. Rogers v. Edwards, 413 F.Supp. 933 (D.Minn.1975).

We have carefully examined the record made in the district court together with the briefs, and we have heard oral argument by the parties. In our opinion, no useful purpose would be served by reciting the facts or redetermining the law and the application thereof to the facts of this case. The district court has written a comprehensive opinion cited above which correctly determines the case and we affirm on the basis of that opinion.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This suit was brought by the heirs of two deceased lawyers seeking a declaration relating to attorneys’ fees following successful prosecution of claims before the Indian Claims Commission. The defendants are two attorneys who were parties to a fee sharing contract with the plaintiffs’ decedents. The suit involves a construction of this contract. The district court found in favor of the plaintiffs. Rogers v. Edwards, 413 F.Supp. 933 (D.Minn.1975).

We have carefully examined the record made in the district court together with the briefs, and we have heard oral argument by the parties. In our opinion, no useful purpose would be served by reciting the facts or redetermining the law and the application thereof to the facts of this case. The district court has written a comprehensive opinion cited above which correctly determines the case and we affirm on the basis of that opinion.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

547 F.2d 1056, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 10513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ida-j-rogers-appellees-plaintiffs-v-rodney-j-edwards-and-james-r-ca8-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack