Baca v. Padilla

Citations

• 26 N.M. 223
• 190 P. 730

Syllabus

<p>SYULABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Section I860, Code 1915, by implication authorizes the appearance oí private counsel on behalf of the state in criminal proceedings “on order of the court, with the consent of the district attorney or Attorney General.’’ P. 226</p> <p>2. Contracts by attorneys at law for contingent fees are generally upheld by the courts, but a contract by an attorney at law to assist in the prosecution of a criminal case for a contingent feé, dependent upon the conviction of the accused, is contrary to public policy. P. 226</p> <p>3. Where an attorney at law enters into a contract with another to assist in the prosecution of a criinal case for a contingent fee, the contract is void and there can be no recovery on the contract, but such a contract is not inherently malum is se or malum prohibitum, and the attorney may recover the reasonable value of his services on a quantum meruit. P. 229</p> <p>4.When the illegality, either in whole or in part, is in the thing which the party seeking to recover was to do, then there can be no recovery upon a quantum meruit, but where the illegality was not in what the plaintiff was to do but in in the manner in which he was to be compensated for doing the legal thing, then he can recover upon a quantum meruit for the reasonable value of his services. P. 229</p>