From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brink's, Inc. v. Graveson

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Apr 14, 1941
309 Ill. App. 571 (Ill. App. Ct. 1941)

Opinion

Gen. No. 41,470. (Abstract of Decision.)

Opinion filed April 14, 1941.

ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS, § 133.1solicitation, as rendering fee contract invalid. In interpleader suit where tortfeasor paid amount of judgment for injured minor into court, and defendant claimed part of the money under an attorney's lien, evidence that a woman visited the minor's parents at the hospital shortly after the injury and urged the employment of defendant, the latter visited the parents at the hospital room and subsequently at their home, seeking employment, and his brother-in-law paid a moving bill of the parents, showed solicitation by defendant rendering his contingent for contract invalid, and estoppel by verdict was applicable to probate court's finding of solicitation when it vacated order authorizing defendant to act as attorney for guardian of minor.

See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.

MATCHETT, J., dissenting.

Appeal from Superior Court of Cook county; Hon. JOHN C. LEWE, presiding.

Heard in first division, first district, this court at October term, 1940.

Russell F. Locke, for appellant;

Ryan, Sinnott Miller, for certain appellees.


"Not to be published in full." Opinion filed April 14, 1941.


Summaries of

Brink's, Inc. v. Graveson

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Apr 14, 1941
309 Ill. App. 571 (Ill. App. Ct. 1941)
Case details for

Brink's, Inc. v. Graveson

Case Details

Full title:Brink's, Inc., and Brink's Express Company, v. Elizabeth Gravesen and The…

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois, First District

Date published: Apr 14, 1941

Citations

309 Ill. App. 571 (Ill. App. Ct. 1941)
33 N.E.2d 497

Citing Cases

Mason v. Papadopulos

On the instant hearing she denied that she had made such a statement and stated that such statement was not…

Kizer v. Davis

A contract of employment which violates an express prohibition in the Code likewise has been held void as…