Liles v. Liles

• Decision Date: 04 February 1908
• Citation: 107 S.W. 1111,129 Mo. App. 117
• Parties: LILES v. LILES.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

107 S.W. 1111

129 Mo. App. 117

LILES v. LILES.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

February 4, 1908.

PARTITION — ATTORNEY'S SERVICES — NEGLIGENCE.

Since it is the duty of the court to inspect and allow charges of commissioners in partition, and such charges cannot be taxed until they have been approved by the court, the failure of plaintiff's attorney to call the court's attention to the fact that the charges made were excessive did not constitute such negligence as deprived the attorney of the right to an allowance of fees for services rendered other than on contested issues against the interest of the defendants.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lincoln County; Jas. D. Barnett, Judge.

Action by Robert M. Liles against David Liles. From an order allowing an attorney's fee to the firm of Norton, Avery & Young, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

See 91 S. W. 983.

Chas. Martin, for appellant. Norton, Avery & Young, for respondent.

BLAND, P. J.

The appeal is from an order of the Lincoln circuit court, allowing the law firm of Norton, Avery & Young a fee of $200 for their services in bringing and prosecuting a partition suit to a final termination. Robert M. Liles was the plaintiff in said suit, and David Liles et al. were defendants. The suit was to partition 297 acres of land valued at about $4,000. Partition was in kind, and was made by commissioners appointed by the court for that purpose. It appears from the evidence there was a mortgage on the land for about $445, which was brought into court for adjudication in the partition suit. A controversy arose over the amount the several parties to the suit should pay on this mortgage, which was finally settled on an appeal to the Supreme Court from the judgment of the circuit court, taken by defendants. Mr. Avery, of the firm of Norton, Avery & Young, prepared the petition, and tried the case in the circuit, followed it to the Supreme Court, and supervised the preparation of the report of the commissioners. It appears that each commissioner, in his bill of costs, asked $2.50 a day for his services and $1 a day for his expenses while engaged in making partition. It also appears that the county surveyor of Lincoln county was one of the commissioners, and that he, in addition to $2.50 per day asked for his services as commissioner, also claimed $5 per day for his services as surveyor. The charges were in excess of what is allowed by law. The firm of Norton, Avery & Young took no steps to cut down the excessive charges of the commissioners and surveyor. However, a motion was filed by Mr. Martin, representing defendants, to retax the costs, and it seems that on his motion these costs were properly taxed by the court. The evidence shows that $250...