Palmer v. Stire
This text of 197 So. 2d 899 (Palmer v. Stire) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In re: Robert E. Palmer and Charles B. W. Palmer d/b/a Palmer & Palmer and Joseph A. Ory applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of Tangipahoa. 195 So.2d 706.
Writ refused. The result is correct.
I am of the opinion that a writ should be granted.
LSA-R.S. 9:5001 grants an attorney who obtains a judgment in favor of his client a special privilege for the amount of his fee on the judgment and the property recovered thereby.
The holding of the present case permits the client to destroy the privilege at will by “compromising” and cancelling the judgment without the attorney’s consent.
The following questions should be resolved :
(1) What is the nature and extent of the attorney’s special privilege on a judgment and recovery under LSA-R.S. 9:5001 ? See, e. g., Patorno v. Villio, 9 Orleans App. 104; Davis Finance & Securities Co. v. O’Neal, La.App., 160 So. 463; Daggett on Louisiana Privileges and Chattel Mortgage pp. 776-780; and 7 Am.Jur.2d, Attorneys at Law, § 306, p. 217.
(2) Does his special privilege on the judgment make the attorney of record one of the “parties interested” under Civil Code Article 3371, so as to require the attorney’s consent for the cancellation of the judgment? See, e. g., Restatement of Agency 2d, Section 464(3) and 7 Am.Jur.2d, Attorneys at Law, § 306, p. 217.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
197 So. 2d 899, 250 La. 645, 1967 La. LEXIS 2603, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palmer-v-stire-la-1967.