Payne v. Munger

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Payne v. Munger

1 Ky. Op. 388, 1866 Ky. LEXIS 346

DecidedFebruary 19, 1866

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Ky. Op. 388 (Payne v. Munger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Payne v. Munger, 1 Ky. Op. 388, 1866 Ky. LEXIS 346 (Ky. Ct. App. 1866).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Duvall:

The appellant’s motion for a judgment against the appellee for money collected by him as his attomey-at-law seems to have been properly dismissed'. For a valuable consideration the appellant authorized the appellee to collect and retain for his own use the amount which he did collect and retain. This the appellant’s counsel in this court does not controvert. But he insists that the contract for retainer was champertous and void. The record con[389]*389tains no allegation of or attempt to prove any such, illegality. And this court will not presume champerty nor infer it without strong proof. The proportion between the amount collected and that retained is the only fact which squints at champerty; but this, per se, does not even tend to prove it, and especially as the appellee’s services in obtaining and enforcing the judgment in the appellant’s favor, a portion of the amount of which the appellee retained, was not the only consideration of their contract.

Wherefore, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

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

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Duvall:

The appellant’s motion for a judgment against the appellee for money collected by him as his attomey-at-law seems to have been properly dismissed'. For a valuable consideration the appellant authorized the appellee to collect and retain for his own use the amount which he did collect and retain. This the appellant’s counsel in this court does not controvert. But he insists that the contract for retainer was champertous and void. The record con[389]*389tains no allegation of or attempt to prove any such, illegality. And this court will not presume champerty nor infer it without strong proof. The proportion between the amount collected and that retained is the only fact which squints at champerty; but this, per se, does not even tend to prove it, and especially as the appellee’s services in obtaining and enforcing the judgment in the appellant’s favor, a portion of the amount of which the appellee retained, was not the only consideration of their contract.

Wherefore, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Ky. Op. 388, 1866 Ky. LEXIS 346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/payne-v-munger-kyctapp-1866.