Defrancesch v. Hardin - 510 So. 2d 42 (La. Ct. App. 1987)

Rule:

When attorneys jointly undertake to represent a client without contracting for a specific division of fees, they share equally in the fee, and it is immaterial that one attorney may provide more labor or skill than the other. This holding applies when one attorney engages another to assist in the representation of a client under a contingency fee contract. The joint undertaking of legal representation is deemed a "joint venture."

Facts:

Plaintiff Fred R. DeFrancesch, an attorney who worked primarily as a professor, asked defendant A. Edward Hardin, to assist him in a products liability case for one of the plaintiff’s students and the student’s wife (the clients). The clients and both attorneys signed the contingency fee agreement, a settlement was reached, and the defendant received the fee. Plaintiff sued the defendant or half the fee, and the trial court entered judgment for the plaintiff. Defendant appealed. 

Issue:

Under the circumstances, was the plaintiff attorney entitled to half of the fee? 

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

On appeal, the court affirmed and held that the attorneys' representation of the clients was a joint venture because the clients did not sign separate fee agreements with each attorney. The agreement did not provide for a division of the fee. The plaintiff attorney made the initial investigation and determination that the clients had a prima facie case, and the plaintiff was available for consultation and research. Thus, although the defendant may have spent more time on the case than the plaintiff, the fee had to be divided equally between the attorneys. Therefore, the judgment was proper.