Majority
Headnote
Attobney and client—Agbeement—When not sustained.The general inference, from the evidence in this case, is very strong against the defendant. Henderson.
The plaintiff was nearly eighty years of age, and the first transaction between the parties was an agreement upon a foreclosure of a mortgage whereby the defendant, who was the attorney, was to have all the property brought over $3,000. The attorney claims to be entitled to over $3,000 on this transaction. With the plaintiff’s $3,000, a bond and mortgage, given by Caroline J. Haddon and owned by one Dennis, was assigned to plaintiff. Henderson claims to own this mortgage also, and that the reason why the title was taken to plaintiff was that Haddon’s wife was his niece. Subsequently to the taking of the mortgage, and in May, 1884, the defendant’s wife bought a tax title apparently superior to the mortgage, a lease for one thousand years.
In April, 1885, the foreclosure suit was commenced in
The trial judge properly found. against the defendants. The plaintiff was very old. The defendant was her lawyer, and they lived together. The transaction is so inequitable that, as between strangers, such a finding would be justified.
The judgment should therefore be affirmed, with costs.
Pratt, J., concurs: Dykman, J., not sitting.