Kline v. Weintraub

McCOMB, J. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff after trial before the court without a jury in an action for a one-fourth interest in a judgment entered in favor of defendant Sidonie Weintraub against the estate of her deceased husband Harry Weintraub, defendant Sidonie Weintraub appeals.

The conceded facts are:

On or about May 15, 1932, plaintiff’s testator, E. A. Kline, an attorney at law and husband of plaintiff Ethel Kline, entered into an agreement with defendant Sidonie Weintraub reading as follows:

“AGREEMENT

“This Agreement, made this ---- day of May, 1932 by and between Sidonie Weintraub of the City of Los Angeles, State of California, party of the first part, and E. A. Kline of the same place, party of the second part,

“Witnesseth:

“Whereas, the party of the first part is desirous of protecting her rights as against the Estate of Solomon L. Weintraub, her husband now deceased, particularly under an agreement for the payment to her of the sum of $20,000.00 on his death, which agreement was duly executed by party of the first part and her said deceased husband, and which [561]agreement was violated by her said husband in making a will directly contrary to the provisions of said agreement, and

“Whereas, she is desirous of obtaining the services of said B. A. Kline as her attorney in presenting that matter and taking care of her interest within his discretion as an attorney and if necessary bring action for the recovery under said contract.

“Now therefore, This Agreement Witnesseth:

“The party of the first part hereby retains the party of the second part as and for her attorney to carry out the objections and purposes as above set forth and in consideration of services already rendered and to be rendered by said party of the second part she hereby agrees to pay him for said services and hereby, as security therefor, absolutely assigns, sets over and transfers unto him one-fourth ([4]