Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

CADWALLADER v. NEW AMSTERDAM CASUALTY COMPANY (06/30/59)

June 30, 1959

CADWALLADER
v.
NEW AMSTERDAM CASUALTY COMPANY, APPELLANT.



Appeal, No. 191, Jan. T., 1959, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas No. 1 of Philadelphia County, March T., 1956, No. 3613, in case of T. Sidney Cadwallader v. New Amsterdam Casualty Company. Judgment affirmed. Assumpsit. Before DOTY, J. Verdict directed for plaintiff in amount of $5050, defendant's motion for judgment non obstante veredicto refused, and judgment entered on the verdict. Defendant appealed.

COUNSEL

Ralph S. Croskey, with him Norman R. Bradley, for appellant.

Robert K. Greenfield, with him Frederick Blumberg, and Folz, Bard, Kamsler, Goodis & Greenfield, for appellee.

Before Jones, C.j., Bell, Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Bok and Mcbride, JJ.

Author: Mcbride

[ 396 Pa. Page 583]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE MCBRIDE

The plaintiff, T. Sidney Cadwallader, a lawyer, and David A. Clarke, a partner or associate, were both "additional insureds" on a lawyer's protective policy. Under that policy defendant insurance company agreed (1) to pay whatever plaintiff might become obligated to pay resulting from any "claim" made against him arising out of the performance of professional services as a lawyer and caused by any negligent act, error or omission for which he would be legally liable;*fn1 (2) to

[ 396 Pa. Page 584]

    defend on his behalf any suit brought against him alleging such negligent act or omission and seeking damages on account thereof;*fn2 (3) to pay all premiums on bonds required to be filed in connection therewith.*fn3 It was specifically provided that the policy would not apply to intentional misconduct.*fn4

The pleadings consisted of a complaint and answer. At trial there was both documentary and oral testimony, at the end of which the trial judge gave binding instructions for the plaintiff. Defendant did not move for a new trial but, having presented a point for binding directions in its favor, did move for judgment n.o.v., which was refused and judgment for plaintiff was entered on the verdict.

It would appear that four corporations owned some 80 acres of land in Bucks County upon which was erected a sand and gravel plant. A portion of that land was condemned at the instance of the Highway Department

[ 396 Pa. Page 585]

    of Pennsylvania. At that time Harry D. Mencher, a New York lawyer, had represented these four corporations. His Pennsylvania correspondent was Rodney T. Bonsall of Philadelphia. Cadwallader represented two persons who were mortgagees of the property, and in order to protect the interests of his clients in the condemnation award, requested that the appearances of Mencher and Bonsall, as attorneys for the owner corporations, be withdrawn and that he be permitted to act for all the parties interested in the proceedings. Mencher and Bonsall, having done work in the matter, indicated, in writing, their willingness to withdraw their appearances if Cadwallader would see to it that professional fees claimed by them, particularly from two of the real estate corporations, would be retained by him and not forwarded to the clients unless specifically released by them. Cadwallader, in writing, specifically agreed to withhold the sum of $34,486.17 ($30,000 of which was for ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.