Ryman v. Kennedy

Supreme Court of Georgia

Ryman v. Kennedy

80 S.E. 551, 141 Ga. 75, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 326

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedDecember 9, 1913

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 80 S.E. 551 (Ryman v. Kennedy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ryman v. Kennedy, 80 S.E. 551, 141 Ga. 75, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 326 (Ga. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

(After stating the facts.) Fees earned but not collected by the testator prior to his death, and all choses in action belonging to the testator in connection with his 'law business at the time of his death, and pending claims which the' party of the first part had made arrangements with other attorneys to handle, were expressly excluded from the sale, and nothing was left upon which the contract could operate. The professional skill of the testator, as a lawyer,'entered into the contract of employment by his clients, and the possibility that after bis death his clients would [77]*77consent to the selection of other counsel by the executors or others is too remote a contingency to render the “good will” of the testator a subject-matter of sale. Civil Code, §§ 4117, 4953. . The “law business,” by the reservation contained in the contract,-was stripped of its substance, and there was no consideration whatever to support the contract. It was error to dismiss the petition on demurrer. Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Atkinson, J.

(After stating the facts.) Fees earned but not collected by the testator prior to his death, and all choses in action belonging to the testator in connection with his 'law business at the time of his death, and pending claims which the' party of the first part had made arrangements with other attorneys to handle, were expressly excluded from the sale, and nothing was left upon which the contract could operate. The professional skill of the testator, as a lawyer,'entered into the contract of employment by his clients, and the possibility that after bis death his clients would [77]*77consent to the selection of other counsel by the executors or others is too remote a contingency to render the “good will” of the testator a subject-matter of sale. Civil Code, §§ 4117, 4953. . The “law business,” by the reservation contained in the contract,-was stripped of its substance, and there was no consideration whatever to support the contract. It was error to dismiss the petition on demurrer. Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 S.E. 551, 141 Ga. 75, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ryman-v-kennedy-ga-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack