Stephen K. Williams, Appellants v. Orville M. Barkley, Respondent, Impleaded With Another

Summary

The Court affirmed the Appellate Division's order, holding that the prior adjudication on the substitution of attorneys is binding on all parties and their privies with respect to the fund in question, that the operative portion of a contract controls over an inconsistent recital, and that the Baines Brothers are in privity with the Williams attorneys and therefore bound by the earlier determination. The decision rests on principles of res judicata, contract construction, and the definition of privity. Justice Parker, dissenting, would have held that the substituted attorney, not the Baines Brothers, should retain the entire fund.