Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1868-03-20


that it should not be treated as an abso.
lutte nullity.
Chancellor Walworth, in the case of
Howell rs. Ransom, page $40, says: "From
the relation Of attorney and client, which
existed betweeA the complainant and de-
iendant, ii was not necessary 10 prove actual
fraud on the part Of the attorney and u
The court IS not bound 20 set aside the contract
| Of sale IN such cases the whole burden of
establishing the fairness of the sale, and
that 1t wac made upon full and adequate
consideration, is at least upon the attorney.
| The attorney can never sustain a pur-
chase Of this kind without showing
! that he communicated to his client
| everything which was necessary 10 enable
him to form 4 correct Judgment Of the ac-
tual value Of the subject of the purchase,
and also as 10 The pr0priety Of selling it at the
price offered, and he neglect Of The attorney
10 ascertain The true state Of he facts himself
will not sustain his purchase"
In the case Of Starr Us. Nanderheyden,
9 Johns, 252, the court say The court,
from general principles of policy and
equity, will always look into the dealings
between attorney aud client, and guard the
latter from any undue consequences result
ing from a situation in which he may be
supposed to stand unequal" And the
Judge, in giving in the opinion of the court,
cites with special commentator the re-
marks of the Lord Chancellor in Newman
as. Payne, : YES, 30, saying, sit is put
commonly upon one of the cases which
hold that upon general eonsid-
'erations of policy, the court, with
out entering into the means used by
the attorney or the personal character of
the parties, but merely upon the relation
Of attorney and client, will order all trans
actions TO be opened between the parties,
for it is fit that they should be inquired
into and the law would be defeated, if by
reason Of any security given or settlement
made, an inquiry was precluded."
In the case of Lewis rs. Morgan, Price,
AZ, the complainant was himself barris-
ter, and Alderman and Magistrate of the
city of London, had been Sheriff and
| Mayor, was an excellent accountant, and
closed up all his transactions with his at
torney, which transactions related to pro-
fessional services and money loaned, and
receipts had been passed between them !;
besides the bill was not strong one, in its
| allegations charged errors in the general
settlement but pointed out no specific err
rors. The Judge says: "This is q case
Of attorney and client; an attorney has
often been described TO be an officer of the
court and in that character responsible for
the protection of his client from ali acts
which may prove detrimental TO him. 1t
is his duty TO apprise him of the legal con-
sequences of his actions, and decreed the
settlement to be opened and reviewed.
J These cases and many others, indicate
too clearly the high and delicate relations
] that an attorney sustains 10 his client and
while these cases are not cited by the court
as cases selected from the great mass of
learning on this subject, TO be specially APP
| proved in every part and upon the facts of
each-yet they serve as sources whence to
draw a few general principles, which prin-
ciples are, that person standing in rela-
ton TO another of an attorney and
general manager and director, and
having procured such party to ex-
ecute an instrument or contract by
which such attorney is to be ben
Gifted, and this contract or written instru-
ment becomes afterwards the subject of lit
igation between the parties, and is assailed
by the client, that it becomes the attorney,
not merely 10 rely on the written contract
or instrument, but to show all the facts
necessary to sustain it as a paper of high
merits and TO do this he must show chiefly
that the client understood the whole mat
ter dd item, was fully and completely in.
formed of the nature, result and conse-
Guences of the instrument or contract,
was advised with the highest good faith
(,Gberrund fdes) of each and every circum-
stance likely to influence his mind or feel
ings against the execution of the paper
and more than this must he show, namely,
that he has informed himself of all the
facts necessary 10 give his client full in
formation, and in the greatest freedom
has impaired il TO his client, together with
such legal knowledge of the consequences
of The same, and its true legal construction,
go far as the client might command his
legal knowledge in the same matter with a
third person, and TO the same extent that
the law imposes it upon every attorney
TO impart TO his client the legal conse-
quences of his acts.
An attorney is a man set apart by the
law to expound to all persons who seek
him the laws of the land, relating TO the
high interests of property, liberty and life
To this end, he is licensed and permitted
to make charges for his services The re-
lation he bears to his client implies the
highest trust and confidence. The client
LAYS bare TO his attorney his very nature
aud heart, leans and relies upon him for
support and protection in the saddest hours
of his life. Knowing not which way 10 90
to attain his rights, he puts himself under
the guidance of his attorney, and confides
that he will lead him Alright.
In an affair between a client and a third
party, it would most certainly be the duty
of an attorney, not only to relate to his
client all the facts relative to the subject
matter, but TO explain the nature of the OBJ
legation he was about TO assume, and its
effects and legal consequences upon him
personally, as well as upon his estate. If
this be true in the character of the case
supposed, how much more is it the duty of
an attorney himself dealing with his client,
TO make Just, fair and reasonable contract,
and have it declared in terms incapable of
ambiguity, free from complications and in
Movements, and which no intelligent and
reasonable man could fail to comprehend.
Contracts are not unfrequently things of
items and parts, connected and discon-
nected, and to each item and part there
must be a mutual assent of minds.
IL a written contract was susceptible of
two constructions, fairly and reasonably,
and the one mind assented to il upon the
one construction, and the other upon the
other construction, this would be no con-
tract at all between the parties; and were
II contract between attorney and client,
it would be the duty of the attorney to in
form the client of the fact of its suscept-
blhty of two constructions, and having
pointed ont this liability of the contract,
proceed to know definitely and clearly his
clients views before proceeding further.
An attorney dealing with has client for
further professional services, and the con-
tract is reduced to writing, Is Bound 10 show
when he seeks to enforce il that the latter
fully understood its meaning and effect,
and that each understood it in the same
sense; otherwise it cannot be enforced.
To be continued
In Chancery at Nashville.
Set, oC Tannossoo-- Ofs an fylort- - A.