Styer v. Hugo
David L. STYER, Esquire, Appellant, v. Randall W. HUGO, Esquire
Styer v. Hugo, 637 A.2d 276 (Pa. 1994)
Opinion
*611 ORDER PER CURIAM:
Order affirmed.
MONTEMURO, J., is sitting by designation as Senior Justice pursuant to Judicial Assignment Docket No. 94 R1800, due to the unavailability of LARSEN, J., see No. 127 Judicial Administration Docket No. 1, filed October 28, 1993.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 4 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(holding that an attorney who initially represents a client and is dismissed does not have a quantum meruit action against the attorney who ultimately settles the case)
-
(discharged attorney not entitled to portion of recovery from subsequent counsel, when record established no contribution by discharged attorney to ultimate settlement and no knowledge on part of subsequent counsel that former attorney expected payment)
-
(“[T]he most significant element of the doctrine is whether the enrichment of the defendant is unjust. The doctrine does not apply simply because the defendant may have benefited as a result of the actions of the plaintiff.”)
Cited by 52 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Courts of Appeals1
- Federal District Courts18
- Bankruptcy Courts4
- State Highest Courts1
- State Appellate Courts24
- State Trial Courts4
Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.