Union Pacific R. Co. v. Laughlin,
247 U.S. 204 (1918)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Union Pacific R. Co. v. Laughlin, 247 U.S. 204 (1918)

Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Laughlin

No. 23

Argued April 18, 1918

Decided May 20, 1918

247 U.S. 204


A state statute giving an attorney a lien on the cause of action or its proceeds for an agreed portion of any recovery, and rendering the actual or proposed defendant directly liable to him for its satisfaction in case of settlement after notice without his consent, does not deprive the party thus made liable of any constitutional right, even where the settlement is made under a judgment recovered upon the cause of action through another attorney in the federal court and by satisfying such judgment by payment to the clerk of that court.

A contrary contention raises no substantial federal question.

So held where the cause of action (for personal injuries) arose in another state.

Writ of error to review 196 Mo.App. 541 dismissed.

The case is stated in the opinion.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.