Stein v. Voight CA4/3
Ernest Voight appeals from a judgment holding him liable, on a theory of quantum meruit, for the value of attorney services rendered to him by Andrew M. Stein and Jerry L. Steering.
Voight argues the trial court erred because (1) Stein and Steering’s retainer agreement is void as no fully executed copy was ever provided to him; (2) the attorneys’ billing records are inadequate to support the time they claim to have spent on his behalf, and at least one entry is fraudulent; (3) Stein and Steering abandoned him and the court’s Statement of Decision mischaracterizes the termination of the attorney-client relationship; (4) the retainer agreement did not authorize Stein and Steering to condition their representation of him on obtaining a continuance of his scheduled trial; and (5) Stein and Steering spent a portion of the funds he entrusted to them on unauthorized expenses. Voight also claims the trial court erred in its pretrial discovery rulings and by refusing to allow him to in
Comments on Stein v. Voight CA4/3