Hargis v. Louisville Gas Co.

• Decision Date: 04 November 1893
• Citation: 23 S.W. 790
• Parties: HARGIS et al. v. LOUISVILLE GAS CO.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

23 S.W. 790

HARGIS et al. v. LOUISVILLE GAS CO.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

November 4, 1893

Appeal from Louisville chancery court.

Action by Hargis & Eastin against the Louisville Gas Company for professional services as attorneys. From a judgment in defendant's favor, plaintiffs appeal. Reversed.

Simrall & Bodley, Muir & Heyman, O'Neal, Jackson & Phelps, Thos H. Hines, and Hargis & Eastin, for appellants.

Humphrey & Davie, Helm & Bruce, and Dodd & Dodd, for appellees.

LEWIS J.

It was evidently not contemplated by parties to the contract in question as at all probable the supreme court would in due course of business reach and try the case of Louisville Gas Company against Citizens' Gaslight Company before December 1, 1888, when corporate existence of the former would end. Consequently the only way by which the latter could be "excluded from making and vending gas in the city of Louisville and to its citizens" on and from October 1, 1885, was by means of provisional remedies. To accomplish that object, Hargis & Eastin advised application for an order of supersedeas to be followed by action for injunction restraining the Citizens' Gaslight Company making and vending gas pending appeal in the supreme court and they were employed principally for that purpose. But the effort to obtain the order of supersedeas, though abortive resulted in an order for advancement and submission of the case, November 1, 1885; and it was actually tried and decided in favor of the Louisville Gas Company in December, a few days more than two months after October 1, 1885, and more than three years before expiration of corporate existence of the Louisville Gas Company. Thus the provisional remedies contemplated by the contract became of little, if any practical value to the Louisville Gas Company. But it is plain the case would not have been advanced and tried by the supreme court but for the advice and efforts of Hargis & Eastin to apply for an order of supersedeas, and therefore, while they did not nor could they stop the Citizens' Gaslight Company making and vending gas by the identical day mentioned in the contract, the result followed their advice and efforts soon thereafter, and in time to subserve the purpose of their employment by the Louisville Gas Company; so that, as they acted in good faith throughout, and did not obtain the injunction contemplated simply because their previous service had rendered it...