Morley v. Henske

Missouri Court of Appeals

Morley v. Henske

735 S.W.2d 1, 1987 Mo. App. LEXIS 3801

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Morley v. Henske. Read the opinion of the Court — 704 S.W.2d 296 →

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 17, 1987·No. No. 51843·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The defendant below, Robert E. Henske, appeals from an award of $680 to the respondent, plaintiff below, Robert E. Morley, an attorney, on Morley’s quantum me-ruit claim based on the legal services which he rendered to appellant before his contingent fee contract with appellant was rescinded by mutual agreement. An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.-16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The defendant below, Robert E. Henske, appeals from an award of $680 to the respondent, plaintiff below, Robert E. Morley, an attorney, on Morley’s quantum me-ruit claim based on the legal services which he rendered to appellant before his contingent fee contract with appellant was rescinded by mutual agreement. An extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.-16(b).

Morley v. Henske, 735 S.W.2d 1, 1987 Mo. App. LEXIS 3801 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

735 S.W.2d 1 (Morley v. Henske) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.