O'Neill v. Campbell
This text of 118 A.D. 64 (O'Neill v. Campbell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
The material facts are fully stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Ingraham. It does not appear that the conversation between the client and the person who represented the plaintiffs in procuring the retainer, upon which it is sought to invalidate it, took place before the retainer was signed, or that the client was induced thereby to execute the retainer. I am of opinion, therefore, that' the appellant failed to show facts sufficient to require an adjudication that the retainer was invalid.
It follows that the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.
Patterson, P. J., and Houghton, J., concurred; Ingraham and Lambert, JJ., dissented.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
118 A.D. 64, 103 N.Y.S. 150, 39 N.Y. Civ. Proc. R. 121, 1907 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oneill-v-campbell-nyappdiv-1907.