16 P.2d 188 | Cal. Ct. App. | 1932
THE COURT.
The plaintiff appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendants in an action to rescind a contract. The appeal is presented on the judgment-roll alone.
The defendants are attorneys, and plaintiff is the widow of Fred Grauberger, deceased, who left estate in Colorado and California. By the contract in question plaintiff employed the defendants to represent her in all matters connected with the settlement of her husband's estate in Colorado and in any litigation growing out of the same, and agreed to pay them for their services twenty-five per cent of all property secured to her from the estate. The complaint alleged in substance that she entered into the contract without independent advice, and was induced to do so by the false representations of one of the defendants; that they rendered no service thereunder, and had accepted employment *578 as attorneys for a third person who was seeking to enforce a claim against her husband's estate. These averments were denied, the answer further alleging that the action was barred by laches. Defendants also sought to recover a balance of $497.99 unpaid under the contract, which they alleged they had fully performed.
The court found in accordance with the answer, and entered judgment denying a rescission and for the recovery by the defendants of the above sum.
Plaintiff claims that the transaction was tainted with fraud and that the court erred in awarding judgment against her.
[1] As stated, the appeal is presented on the judgment-roll alone. Consequently, the findings which are contrary to plaintiff's contention cannot be reviewed (Spring Valley WaterCo. v. County of Alameda,
While, as urged by plaintiff, an attorney may not assume a position adverse to his client without the latter's consent (6 Cor. Jur., Attorney and Client, sec. 105, p. 619) here it is clear from the findings that the defendants were employed by plaintiff with the full knowledge of their previous employment by the claimant, that there was no concealment or bad faith on their part, and that she suffered no prejudice by reason of their relations with the claimant.
The findings support the conclusions of the trial court and the judgment is accordingly affirmed.