Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benev. Soc. v. Chicago & Suburb Hungarian Aid Soc.
Decision Date | 04 April 1918 |
Docket Number | No. 11712.,11712. |
Citation | 283 Ill. 99,118 N.E. 1012 |
Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Parties | CHICAGO & VICINITY HUNGARIAN BENEV. SOC. v. CHICAGO & SUBURB HUNGARIAN AID SOC. et al. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Second Branch Appellate Court, First District, on Appeal from Superior Court, Cook County; Denis E. Sullivan, Judge.
Bill by the Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benevolent Society against the Chicago & Suburb Hungarian Aid Society. To review the decree rendered, the plaintiff filed a bill of review in the superior court, making Alphonse Lefkow a defendant. Defendant Lefkow was adjudged to be in contempt of court, and he appealed to the Appellate Court, where such judgment was reversed. To review the judgment of the Appellate Court, the plaintiff brings certiorari. Affirmed.Charles R. Whitman, of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.
Frank H. Culver and Irene M. Lefkow, both of Chicago, for defendant in error.
Defendant in error, Alphonse Lefkow, was by the superior court of Cook county adjudged guilty of contempt of court for failure, to pay and restore to the custody of the court $616.33 obtained by him from the clerk of said court, and which the court had previously ordered him to pay to said clerk.
If we correctly understand the situation, which is imperfectly stated in the briefs, some time prior to 1913 the Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benevolent Society filed a bill in chancery to dissolve the Chicago & Suburb Hungarian Aid Society, which last-named society, had been doing business since 1894, claiming to be a corporation organized not for pecuniary profit. That bill was dismissed for want of equity, and Alphonse Lefkow, defendant in error here, who had acted as attorney for complainant in that suit, sued his client in the municipal court of Chicago for services rendered, and secured a judgment against it by default for $200, which judgment he assigned to Emma Lord, and garnishment proceedings were begun against the Illinois Trust & Savings Bank and the Continental & Commercial Trust and Savings Bank, in each of which the Chicago & Suburb Hungarian Aid Society had funds on deposit to its credit, for the purpose of collecting said judgment. Apparently the garnishment proceeding was instituted on the theory that the Chicago & Suburb Hungarian Aid Society had no corporate existence, and that the money on deposit to its credit belonged to the members of said society, a part of whom were also members of the Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benevolent Society. The Chicago & Suburb Hungarian Aid Society thereupon, in May, 1913, filed its bill in the superior court of Cook county against the Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benevolent Society, the defendant in error, Emma Lord, and numerous other individuals, and the two banks mentioned. The bill prayed that defendant in error and Emma Lord be enjoined from prosecuting the garnishment suit; that the former members of the complainant society be enjoined from using the Hungarian and American names, and that the charter of the Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benevolent Society be declared void. Such proceedings were had in that case that the master in chancery, to whom the cause was referred, reported, recommending that a decree be entered dividing the funds claimed by the complainant between it and the defendant society in certain proportions mentioned, the share of the defendant society being $667.31. The master further recommended that the complainant society pay 75 per cent. of the costs and the defendant society 25 per cent. The master further found and reported that the defendant society was indebted to defendant in error, Lefkow, in the sum of $200 for legal services rendered in the suit of the Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benevolent Society against the Chicago & Suburb Hungarian Aid Society; that he also represented the Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benevolent Society in the suit then pending, and had rendered services therein, and that the entire services rendered by defendant in error for the Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benevolent Society were reasonably worth $500; and the master recommended that upon the payment of said sum to defendant in error he should cause to be satisfied his judgment in the municipal court for $200 and dismiss the garnishment proceedings. The master also reported that the usual and reasonablefee for the services of the complainant's solicitor in the suit was $600, and that said sum should be paid to said solicitor out of the amount found due the complainant society. The banks had previously paid to the clerk of the court, pursuant to an interlocutory decree, the amounts they had on deposit to the credit of the complainant society. Deducting the defendant society's share of the cost of that litigation left in the hands of the clerk $616.33, which the master found belonged to the defendant society. Defendant in error, Lefkow, as its attorney, collected and received from the clerk the whole of said sum of $616.33. The decree is identical with the master's report, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Laff v. John O. Butler Co.
...of an attorney in the conduct and management of a case are binding on his client. (Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benevolent Society v. Chicago & Suburb Hungarian Aid Society (1918), 283 Ill. 99, 118 N.E. 1012; Bergman v. Rhodes (1929), 334 Ill. 137, 165 N.E. 598, 65 A.L.R. 344.) It is equall......
-
Nolting v. Civil Service Commission of City of Chicago
...into it was questionable. Bergman v. Rhodes, 334 Ill. 137, 165 N.E. 598, 65 A.L.R. 344; Chicago & Vicinity Hungarian Benevolent Society v. Chicago & Suburb Aid Society, 283 Ill. 99, 118 N.E. 1012; Fessler v. Weiss, 348 Ill.App. 21, 107 N.E.2d 795. What the court did in the instant case was ......
-
Cook County v. Schroeder
...N.E. 80]; Village of Dolton v. Dolton Estate, 331 Ill. 88 [162 N.E. 214]; [Chicago & Vicinity] Hungarian Benevolent Society v. [Chicago & Suburb Hungarian] Aid Society, 283 Ill. 99 [188 N.E. 1012].)' A client always has the right to revoke the ordinary authority possessed by the attorney of......
-
Village of Dolton v. S. Ellen Dolton Estate
...acts without authority from his client the remedy of the client is against his counsel. Chicago Hungarian Benevolent Society v. Chicago Hungarian Aid Society, 283 Ill. 99, 118 N. E. 1012. It has been held repeatedly that a judgment of confirmation cannot be set aside after the term at which......