Maryland case law › Van Meter v. Wilkinson

Van Meter v. Wilkinson

187 Md. 492 (1947) · Court of Appeals of Maryland
Court of Appeals of MarylandDisposition: AffirmedGrason✓ Good law
HoldingLois C.

Grason, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. On July 10, 1930, C. C. Calhoun (a lawyer) entered into an agreement with S. L. Van Meter, Jr. (who was not a lawyer, but was a retired officer of the United States Army), as appears hereafter. On August 17, 1933, Calhoun made an assignment to Van Meter, which will be referred to later. Van Meter died in 1937 and Calhoun died in August, 1938.

Suit was instituted in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County by Lois C. Van Meter, widow and administratrix of the estate of Van Meter, (appellant), against Wilkinson and Neubeck, executors under the will of Calhoun, (appellees). The declaration contained three counts: (1) based on the assignment; (2) money received by the defendants for the use of the plaintiff; and (3) money found to be due from the defendants to the plaintiff on accounts stated between them. A demand for particulars was filed, which alleged that the “cause of action is based upon a certain Memorandum in writing, or written contract, dated July 10, 1930, in the possession of the Plaintiff, which said written instrument will, upon its face, disclose that these Defendants are not in anyway indebted to this Plaintiff.” Response was made to 495 the Bill of Particulars by the defendants, in which they disclaim that the cause of action is based on the written contract dated July 10, 1930, and that that instrument will not disclose that the defendants are in any way indebted to the plaintiff. Nevertheless, in response to the demand for Bill of Particulars, the plaintiff exhibited the written contract of July 10, 1930, in order to avoid delay.

To the declaration, thus particularized, defendants filed general issue pleas. The case was heard by the court without a jury, a verdict for the defendants was rendered, judgment extended, from which this appeal is taken. The court below filed a written opinion in the case. Calhoun practiced law in Washington, D. C. Captain David McD.

Shearer (a retired captain in the United States Army) had a claim against the United States “for the use or manufacture of inventions.” It is not made clear in the record how Calhoun and Shearer and Van Meter (the two latter retired officers of the United States Army) were brought together, but we find by the agreement, dated July 10, 1930, that Calhoun was employed to prosecute this claim against the government and that he, in this agreement, covenanted to pay Van Meter “one-half of the net amount received by him as fees for said work.” The costs of services of patent lawyers, court costs, stenographers’ charges, railroad fare and hotel bills, if any, were to be paid by Hazel L. Fauber and Shearer, and if such expenses “are not paid by said parties, and either of the parties to this contract pays such expenses, he is to be reimbursed therefor at the rate of three for two before the aforesaid division of fees is made.” It further provided that “the party of the second part (Van Meter) agrees to diligently assist in every way possible in the collection of said claims.” It appears that Calhoun, at that time, had two claims against the government, one for Shearer and the other for Hazel L. Fauber, and he agreed to pay Van Meter one-half of the net amount of his fees, less certain expenses and costs that might not be paid by the parties. 496 The assignment, dated the 17th day of August, 1933, recites that Van Meter rendered services to Calhoun in connection with the prosecution of Shearer’s claim against the government “in accordance with and pursuant to a certain contract dated July 10, 1930, by and between said C. C. Calhoun and S. L. Van Meter, Jr.,” and in consideration of the sum of one dollar, “and in further consideration of the services which have been rendered by said S. L. Van Meter, Jr., as aforesaid, to- me, and in further consideration of the modification of the aforesaid contract between C. C. Calhoun and S. L. Van Meter, Jr., dated July 10, 1930, in that this assignment shall be considered a modification of the said agreement dated July 10, 1930, in so far only as it assigns the compensation to be paid to and eliminates any required future services to be rendered by S. L. Van Meter, Jr., in connection with the claim of Captain David McD. Shearer against the United States, as evidenced by the signature of said S. L. Van Meter Jr., thereto, I hereby agree to transfer, assign, and set over to the said S. L. Van Meter, Jr., his executors, administrators, and assigns, and by this assignment do transfer, assign and set over to S. L. Van Meter, Jr., out of the compensation payable to me for my work in connection with said lawsuit of Captain David McD. Shearer’s a sum equivalent to six and one quarter (6^4) per cent of the gross amount of any money awarded to the said Captain David McD. Shearer either by judgment of any Court or by compromise and settlement * * Section 198, U. S. C. A., Title 18 (Criminal Code, Section 109), provides: “Whoever, being an officer of the United States, * * * shall act as an agent or attorney for prosecuting any claim against the United States, or in any

This is a preview of Van Meter v. Wilkinson. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.