SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY ET AL.

v.

WASHINGTON EX REL. YELLOW CAB SERVICE, INC.

Citator

Cited By

• Labat v. Bennett, 365 F.2d 698 (5th Cir. 1966)
  …habeas proceeding to the district court for that court to decide whether Negroes were “limited and excluded in the selection of petit jury panels” in Orleans Parish. United States ex rel. Poret and Labat v. Sigler, 1960, 361 U.S. 375, 80 S.Ct. 404, 4 L.Ed.2d 380. After an evidentiary hearing, the district court found: since the petitioners had failed to make timely objections to the grand jury and the petit jury, “they are now deemed to have waived these objections”; “that disproportions which exist between…

  ← 1 / 3 →
• Farmington Dowel Prods. Co. v. Forster MFG. Co., Inc., 421 F.2d 61 (1st Cir. 1969)
  …., Fitzgerald v. Freeman, 409 F. 2d 427 (7th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 875, 90 S.Ct. 151, 24 L.Ed.2d 134 (1969) ; Gair v. Peck, 6 N.Y.2d 97, 188 N.Y.S.2d 491, 160 N.E. 2d 43, 77 A.L.R.2d 390 (1959), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 374, 80 S.Ct. 401, 4 L.Ed.2d 380 (1960) ; Taylor v. Bemis, 110 U.S. 42, 45-46, 3 S.Ct. 441, 28 L.Ed. 64 (1884) ; McCreary v. Joel, 186 So. 2d 4, 6 (Fla.1966) ; see F. MacKinnon, Contingent Fees for Legal Services, p. 66 (1964). . We can think of at least three reasons why a court…
• Cooper v. Singer, 719 F.2d 1496 (10th Cir. 1983)
  …Court, 66 N.J. 258, 330 A. 2d 350 (1974) (courts may promulgate rules regulating contingent fee arrangements); accord Gair v. Peck, 6 N.Y.2d 97, 188 N.Y. S.2d 491, 160 N.E. 2d 43 (1959), appeal dismissed and cert. denied, 361 U.S. 374, 80 S.Ct. 401, 4 L.Ed.2d 380 (1960); Annot., 77 A.L.R.2d 411 (1961). See also ABA Canons of Professional Ethics, Canon 13 (1908) (“A contract for a contingent fee ... should always be subject to the supervision of a court, as to its reasonableness”). The issue then is not wh…

Authorities Cited

• San Diego Bldg. Trades Council v. Garmon, 359 U.S. 236 (U.S. 1959)