holding that attorneys must prove that their fees are fair but, absent such findings, nevertheless considering evidence to support judgment allowing attorney to retain a portion of fees
How later courts described this case
- holding that attorneys must prove that their fees are fair but, absent such findings, nevertheless considering evidence to support judgment allowing attorney to retain a portion of fees
- noting that after respondent “established that the conveyance was executed and delivered during the existence of the attorney-client relationship, the burden was on petitioner to show that his acquisition of the interest conveyed by the deed was fair, honest[,] and equitable”
- explaining that “[a]ctual fraud usually involves dishonesty of purpose or intent to deceive”
- explaining that courts “scrutinize with jealousy all contracts [with a fiduciary]”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
POPE, Justice,
(concurring).
Mrs. Griffith asserted that her contract was originally made at a time when she was a married woman and that the contract was voidable. The attorney-client relationship arose while she was thus favored. This fiduciary relationship lodged the burden of proof upon her attorney to overcome her charge that the fee was unreasonable. 1 Black, Rescission and Cancellation, §§ 48, 51 (2d ed. 1929). Counsel, charged with that burden, failed to convince the trier of fact. The judgment must therefore be affirmed.