Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Success Stories of Personal Injury Lawyers Directory US Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Canada Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Resource Directory
Search Lawyers by Zip Code
facebook.com/injury.usa

  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Spruance v. Thomas

11/13/2002

igned the second "referral fee authorization" limiting Spruance to a total referral fee of $100,000, there is no triable issue of material fact precluding judgment in favor of Spruance on the contract claim. Having initially consented to D&T;s agreement to pay a 15 percent referral fee to Spruance, Dircks could not revoke that consent.


As the Court of Appeal explained in Margolin v. Shemaria, supra, 85 Cal.App.4th at page 903, rule 2-200's requirement of informed written consent by the client "ensures that the client will not later claim there was no consent." This protection afforded the referring lawyer by the client's written authorization, recognized in Margolin, would be meaningless if the client retained the right to revoke that consent: There would be no need to "claim there was no consent"; the consent would simply be withdrawn whenever the lawyer to whom the case had been referred convinced the client to do so (thereby capturing all the fees for himself or herself).


Recognition of Dircks's subsequent revocation of his consent to payment of a referral fee after the referral had in fact been made, moreover, would be tantamount to permitting an offer to enter into a unilateral contract to be revoked after performance by the offeree. California law has never permitted such an inequitable result, even when performance was only partially complete. (E.g., Aronowicz v. Nalley's, Inc. (1972) 30 Cal.App.3d 27, 43 & fn. 14; Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. v. Commodore Productions & Artists Inc. (1959) 167 Cal.App.2d 463, 469.) In this case, Spruance fully performed the requested act -- referring Dircks to D&T;for representation in Dircks's personal injury case. The trial court correctly held that Spruance was entitled to judgment on his breach of contract cause of action as a matter of law.


DISPOSITION


The judgment is affirmed. Spruance is to recover his costs on appeal.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS


We concur:


JOHNSON, Acting P. J.


WOODS, J.






Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 

California Personal Injury Attorneys    Personal Injury Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Personal Injury Lawyers Brain Injuries Spinal Cord Injuries
Quadriplegia and Paraplegia Back Injuries Ruptured & Herniated Disks
Bulging Disk Neck Injuries Dog Bites
Toxic Mold Product Liability Fire Accidents
Trucking Accidents Boating Accidents Car Accidents
Plane Crashes Medical Malpractice Motorcycle Accidents
Wrongful Death Personal Injury Lawsuits Testimonial
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites
DUI Defense  |  SiteMap  | PI Blog  | Trading Partners | Attorney Registration  | PI Case Laws  | FAQ | Personal Injury Forum
 | Personal Injury Lawyers Directory  | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2005. “National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (NAPIL)”. All rights reserved.
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE