Laredo National Bank v. Gordon

61 F.2d 906 (1932)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Gordon (P) filed a suit against the Rosenblums to recover $144,000 which they had fraudulently procured from D. P brought the suit upon an agreement that he was to receive a contingent fee of 25 per cent. of the amount recovered. D and its local attorney then entered into negotiations with the Rosenblums for a compromise settlement. D wired P that, acting upon his suggestion, it would refuse to accept a proposition of settlement which the Rosenblums had made, but added: 'in case there should be a counter proposition from them which we may consider acceptable advise what are your minimum fees.' P replied by wire that he felt confident his fee could be adjusted reasonably in the light of prior arrangements and subsequent developments, but that he would welcome the bank's suggestion in regard to his fee. D wired P, stating that its proposition had not been accepted, but that 'we must know immediately what will be your fees in the event we accept settlement offered us. Answer quick'; and D replied, 'Answering today's telegram twelve thousand five hundred dollars.' Nothing further was said about fees pending negotiations for settlement, which continued until June 16, 1930, when D received in settlement of its claim against the Rosenblums about $50,000 in cash, securities of the estimated value of $94,000, and a note of Joseph Rosenblum for $66,000. D wrote P that the bank would pay a reasonable fee, but that the amount mentioned in his telegram of March 10 was beyond reason. P testified that before he received this last-mentioned letter, he had already dismissed the suit against the Rosenblums, in compliance with the directions of D's local attorney. The jury gave the verdict to P and D appealed.