1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.App.3d
  4. 155 Cal.App.3d
  5. 155 Cal.App.3d 563 (1984)
 

HENSEL v. COHEN

Docket No. B001242.

155 Cal.App.3d 563 (1984)

202 Cal. Rptr. 85

BRUCE M. HENSEL et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. BARRY COHEN et al., Defendants and Appellants.

Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Five.

May 8, 1984.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

COUNSEL

Lewis, D'Amato, Brisbois & Bisgaard and Lawrence N. Halperin for Defendants and Appellants.

Brodey & Price and Howard R. Price for Plaintiffs and Respondents.

OPINION

FEINERMAN, P.J.

(1a) May an attorney accept a personal injury case on a contingent fee basis, determine that it is not worth his time to pursue the matter, instruct his client to look elsewhere for legal assistance, but hedge his bet by claiming a part of the recovery if a settlement is made or a judgment obtained through the efforts of a subsequent attorney? We answer this question with a resounding "No." Thus...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases