Rogers v. Randel

Superior Court of Delaware

Rogers v. Randel

2 Del. 499

Superior Court of Delaware·Decided July 5, 1839·Published

Opinion

Assumpsit lies for an attorney’s fee.

In this case the plaintiff recovered two thousand one hundred and eighty four dollars, for services rendered as attorney and counsel for the defendant in the cases of Randel vs. Wright; Randel vs. The Chesapeake and Delaware Canal Company, and other cases growing out of them.

The declaration was on a special contract, with a quantum meruit count; on which last the recovery was had, the plaintiff having failed to prove the special contract.

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

Assumpsit lies for an attorney’s fee.

In this case the plaintiff recovered two thousand one hundred and eighty four dollars, for services rendered as attorney and counsel for the defendant in the cases of Randel vs. Wright; Randel vs. The Chesapeake and Delaware Canal Company, and other cases growing out of them.

The declaration was on a special contract, with a quantum meruit count; on which last the recovery was had, the plaintiff having failed to prove the special contract.

Rogers v. Randel, 2 Del. 499 (Del. Ct. App. 1839).

Pincite

2 Del. 499 (Rogers v. Randel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.