Raymond, James & Associates, Inc. v. Wieneke

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing some ambiguity but concluding that litigation concerning securities transactions under chapter 517 does not fall under the definition of a “public policy enforcement case”
• reversing fee award in amount larger than 40% contingency fee agreed upon by client and attorney because contract did not contain provision permitting a higher fee if set by court, and explaining that to affirm the award would mean a windfall for either the client or the attorney
• where arbitrators stated that they \determined to make an award in favor of the claimants and against [Raymond James] for attorney's fees\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).