In the case of Barnes v. Alexander in 1913, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over attorney fees. The plaintiff, Barnes, had hired two attorneys to represent him in a lawsuit and agreed to pay them one-third of any recovery as their fee. However, he later dismissed these lawyers and hired new ones without settling his financial obligations with the first set of attorneys. When Barnes won his suit and received compensation for damages, the original lawyers sued for their share of this sum based on their initial agreement with Barnes. The court held that an attorney who is discharged by a client without cause has a right to recover from that client what they would have earned if not prematurely terminated from representation under contract law principles (quantum meruit). This decision established important precedent regarding legal ethics and professional responsibility towards clients even after termination or dismissal.

In the dissenting opinion for Barnes v. Alexander, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision to award attorney fees from a fund created through litigation. He argued that an attorney has no right to compensation beyond what was agreed upon in their contract with their client unless there is evidence of fraud or misconduct on part of the client. In this case, he saw no such evidence and therefore believed it was unjustified to grant additional payment from funds recovered by other attorneys' efforts without any contractual agreement supporting it. Furthermore, he contended that if an attorney believes they are entitled to more than what is stipulated in their contract due to extraordinary services rendered, they should negotiate these terms beforehand rather than seeking extra compensation after-the-fact based on vague notions of fairness or equity.