Merritt v. Lambert

3 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 77
CourtNew York Court of Chancery
DecidedOctober 17, 1843
StatusPublished

This text of 3 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 77 (Merritt v. Lambert) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Merritt v. Lambert, 3 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 77 (N.Y. 1843).

Opinion

The chan cellor decided that where a party agrees with his solicitor or attorney to perform the duty of counsel also, upon the hearing or trial of the cause, or upon the argument of motions or petitions, the latter, in his character of counsel, may stipulate for a reasonable reward for his services as such counsel; and is not limited to the counsel fees specified in the fee bill, and which are allowed as between party and party. But that he is not permitted, either as attorney or solicitor, or as counsel, to contract with his client, previous to the termination of the suit, for a part of the demand or subject matter of the litigation, as a compensation for his services.

And that an agreement by which the solicitor is to receive, during the pendency of the suit, the rents and profits of the land in controversy, which rents and profits form a substantial part of the litigation, is void, as being contrary to public policy.

Order appealed from affirmed with costs ; and proceedings remitted.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 77, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merritt-v-lambert-nychanct-1843.