Cosgrove v. Leonard

• Citation: 33 S.W. 777,134 Mo. 419
• Parties: COSGROVE et al. v. LEONARD et al.
• Decision Date: 21 January 1896
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri

33 S.W. 777

134 Mo. 419

COSGROVE et al. v. LEONARD et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

January 21, 1896.

EVIDENCE — EXPERT TESTIMONY — ADVISORY.

In an action to recover for services rendered by an attorney, the evidence of experts as to the value of the services rendered is advisory, and the jury are the proper judges of the value of such services. Sherwood, J., dissenting.

Appeal from circuit court, Cooper county; D. W. Shackleford, Judge.

Action by John Cosgrove and James H. Johnson, partners, against Leverett Leonard and others, to recover for legal services rendered defendants by plaintiffs. From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

This is an action for services rendered defendants by Cosgrove & Johnson, a law firm composed of John Cosgrove and James H. Johnson. Plaintiffs sue for the sum of $4,400 for legal services rendered defendants at their request, the sum of $340.15 for moneys paid out and expended in defraying traveling and other necessary expenses in and about defendants' business, less $142.03, with which they credit defendants. The answer is a general denial. The case was tried to a jury, who rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiffs for the sum of $2,368.03. In due time, plaintiffs filed their motion to set aside the verdict, and for a new trial, assigning, among others, the following grounds therefor: "(1) For the reason that the verdict is against the evidence, against the weight of the evidence, and against the law under the evidence. (2) The verdict is for the wrong amount." "(9) The verdict of the jury was not supported by any evidence in the case." The motion was overruled, and plaintiffs appealed.

Geo. P. B. Jackson, for appellants. Wm. S. Shirk, for respondents.

BURGESS, J. (after stating the facts).

The services sued for were rendered in a suit brought by the firm of Cosgrove & Johnson, attorneys at law, in connection with Messrs. Draffen & Williams, also lawyers, for defendants, against the New York, Lake Erie & Western Railway Company, for $50,000 damages sustained by defendants in this suit for injuries to a herd of cattle while in transit over said railroad, in consequence of its negligence as common carrier. The suit was brought in the circuit court of Saline county. A change of forum was subsequently granted to the United States circuit court for the Western district of Missouri, at Kansas City. There a trial was had, which resulted in a verdict in favor of defendants herein against the company for $26,983.60. The verdict was thereafter set aside on motion of said company, and, by agreement of parties, the venue was changed to the Central division of the Western district of Missouri of said United States court, where another trial was had, resulting in a verdict for defendants herein in the sum of $55,880. The case was then appealed to the supreme court of the United States, where the judgment was affirmed for the sum of $44,000, which was thereafter collected by defendants in this suit. Several lawyers testified as witnesses in the case as to the value of the services rendered by Messrs. Cosgrove & Johnson, some of whom had personal knowledge of the services rendered, and no witness placed the value of the services at less than $4,400.

The only question that we have to deal with here is with respect of the action of the court in overruling plaintiffs' motion for a new trial on the grounds stated. It has been uniformly held by this court that, where a verdict is supported by substantial evidence, it will not interfere with the action of the trial court in overruling a motion for a new trial on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence; nor will it interfere where the evidence is...