CHAMPERTY AND MAINTENANCE - VALIDITY OF CONTINGENT FEE - CONTRACTS BY LAYMEN TO PROSECUTE AND COLLECT CLAIMS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT

Authors

Charles R. Moon Jr., University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

It has often been said by the American courts in recent years that the doctrine of champerty, due to changes in the law of assignment of choses in action and other changes of conditions from those prevailing in England at the time of the origin of the doctrine, is no longer applicable in all its stringency. That conditions have changed cannot be denied; however, neither can it be denied that champerty is a very live doctrine today. The real basis for the doctrine of champerty is that certain contracts are contrary to public policy. When we realize this, we see that our ideas of public policy may change, and undoubtedly have changed, yet this change does not mean the end of the doctrine of champerty, but merely that the qualifications for its application have changed. The courts which say that the doctrine of champerty no longer applies because of changed conditions are thereby showing their misunderstanding of the true basis of the doctrine.

Recommended Citation

Charles R. Moon Jr., CHAMPERTY AND MAINTENANCE - VALIDITY OF CONTINGENT FEE - CONTRACTS BY LAYMEN TO PROSECUTE AND COLLECT CLAIMS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT, 36 Mich. L. Rev. 259 (1937).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol36/iss2/5