Court Opinion

ID: 9446718
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 22:16:52.447567+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:45.315672
License: Public Domain

BURGER, Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
The Guardian who made the contract with counsel has given testimony that the fee contract was not intended to “include work in the Court of Appeals or in the Supreme Court * * That evidence adequately supports the District Judge’s fact finding that the parties made no contract at all for appellate services. Absent an express contract for necessary services rendered on request, counsel is entitled to recover for the reasonable value of services rendered in this court and in the Supreme Court proceedings. The mere fact that this contract for necessary services was made by a Guardian on behalf of an infant should not lead to a result drastically *379different from a contract between two private parties. Hence the finding of the District Gourt seems to me to compel a conclusion that some additional compensation is warranted.