Harding v. Harding

• Decision Date: 26 October 1903
• Parties: HARDING v. HARDING.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

205 Ill. 105

68 N.E. 754

HARDING

v.HARDING. ^*

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Oct. 26, 1903.

Appeal from Appellate Court, First District.

Bill by Adelaide Harding against George F. Harding. From a decree of the Appellate Court (105 Ill. App. 363) affirming a decree of the circuit court awarding plaintiff a specified sum for her solicitor's fees, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.Wm. J. Ammen (Barnum & Barnum, of counsel), for appellant.

Peck, Miller & Starr, for appellee.

WILKIN, J.

This is an appeal from the Appellate Court for the First District, seeking to reverse a judgment there rendered affirming the decree of the circuit court of Cook county allowing appellee, as and for her solicitor's fees in certain chancery causes in the circuit court of Cook county, the sum of $5,000. On July 26, 1897, appellee recovered a decree in a separate maintenance proceeding on a bill filed by her; the court fixing her solicitor's fees and temporary alimony, and also permanent alimony at the sum of $6,400 per annum. Appellant appealed first to the Appellate Court (79 Ill. App. 590), and by further appeal brought the cause to this court (180 Ill. 481, 54 N. E. 587), upon which latter appeal we affirmed the decree of the circuit court in all respects, except as to the allowance of permanent alimony, which was reduced from the sum of $6,400 per annum to $3,600 until the further order of the court, and remanded the cause to the circuit court, with directions to proceed in conformity with the views expressed in our opinion. The circuit court, in a contempt proceeding instituted by appellee, found appellant to be in contempt of the court in disregarding the terms of the decree awarding temporary alimony to her, and adjudged that he be committed to the county jail of Cook county until the temporary alimony be paid. Appellant appealed from that judgment, also, to the Appellate Court (79 Ill. App. 621), and from a judgment of affirmance there renderedfurther appealed the cause here (180 Ill. 592, 54 N. E. 604). The petition in the present case was filed in the circuit court while these two appeals to this court were pending, and prayed for the allowance of solicitor's fees for services rendered in prosecuting them.

It is first contended that the circuit court, in this proceeding, was without jurisdiction to entertain the petition. But that contention is without merit. The services for which the allowance is made in this case are such as were rendered since July 26,...