Scharps v. Hess
This text of 120 N.Y.S. 56 (Scharps v. Hess) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Plaintiff has obtained a judgment against defendant for $500 and costs, in a quantum meruit to recover for professional services. These consisted in three consultations relative to a mortgage upon defendant’s property and some examination of authorities upon the same subject, occupying in all about seven hours of plaintiff’s time. He advised a line of defense in a threatened foreclosure suit which has been adopted by defendant’s present attorney, but the result of which is still uncertain. Alsp he offered to appear in the suit on behalf of defendant, and to defend up to trial, for a retainer of $500. He offered, further, to try the case for $500, if unsuccessful, or a larger amount, if successful.
Taking these amounts as plaintiff’s own measure of the value of his services, those which he actually rendered must have been worth considerably less than the amount for which he has obtained judgment. His conduct of the case up to trial, including examination of public records, defendant’s papers, preparation of answer, and possible [57]*57motions and other matters, would have occupied much more than seven hours of his time, and so would the trial, including examination of witnesses and the preparation of a trial brief. Both the trial and conduct of the suit up to trial would have required ability arid learning equal to that which he displayed in consultation. Taking all the facts of this particular case into consideration, plaintiff is entitled to not more than one-half the amount, which he has received.
Judgment modified, by reducing the same to the sum of $250 and costs in the court below, and, as modified, affirmed, with costs to the appellant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
120 N.Y.S. 56, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scharps-v-hess-nyappterm-1909.