49 S.E.2d 835 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1948
1. Where there is an agreement for the payment of a contingent fee, the happening of the contingency is a condition precedent to the right of the attorney to a recovery for his services, and the event which was contemplated must happen.
2. The contingency upon which the attorney was to be entitled to a fee did not happen, and the trial judge did not err in rendering judgment for the defendant in the present case.
1. It was ruled in Stephens v. Fulford,
2. Applying the above principles of law to the facts of this case, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover. The attorney in handling the defendant's claim on a contingency basis of 50% of the amount of the recovery did not recover anything, nor did he obtain any settlement. According to the evidence, the defendant was not at fault in the matter. The contingency upon which the attorney was to be entitled to a fee did not happen, and the trial judge did not err in rendering judgment for the defendant.
Judgment affirmed. Felton and Parker, JJ., concur.