Trimble v. Kansas City, S. & G. Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 22 February 1907
• Citation: 100 S.W. 7,201 Mo. 372
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court
• Parties: TRIMBLE et al. v. KANSAS CITY, S. & G. RY. CO.

100 S.W. 7

201 Mo. 372

TRIMBLE et al. v. KANSAS CITY, S. & G. RY. CO.

Supreme Court of Missouri. Division No. 1.

February 22, 1907.

1. ATTORNEY AND CLIENT — COMPENSATION — PERSONS LIABLE.

Third parties do not become liable to an attorney for fees because they are equally interested with his clients in a case, and stand by without objection and accept the benefit of his services.

2. SAME — VALUE OF SERVICES.

While the time taken in the performance of legal services should be considered in fixing their value, it is of minor importance compared to the character of the litigation, the amount involved, the responsibility assumed, and the benefits derived.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County; A. F. Evans, Judge.

Action by J. McD. Trimble and others against the Kansas City, Shreveport & Gulf Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

See 79 S. W. 678.

This is an action originating in the circuit court of Jackson county, seeking to recover the sum of $10,000, attorney's fees, for services alleged to have been rendered, by respondents, for the appellant, during a period of time extending from April 1, 1899, to March 20, 1900.

The facts of the case are substantially as follows: The Kansas City, Pittsburg & Gulf Railroad Company, which will hereafter be called the "Pittsburg Company," operated a line of railroad from Kansas City, Mo., to Port Arthur, in the state of Texas; and also operated certain terminal railroads at each end thereof. The line of road belonged to three different companies: The Pittsburg, the Kansas City, Shreveport & Gulf Railway Company, which will hereafter be called the "Shreveport Company," and the Texarkana & Ft. Smith Railway Company, which will hereafter be called the "Ft. Smith Company." Through construction and traffic arrangements, the two latter companies bore the relation of auxiliary companies to the former; the exact nature of which is not material to be inquired into in this case. That part of the line lying in the state of Louisiana belonged to the Shreveport Company, the defendant; that part lying in Arkansas and Texas belonged to the Pittsburg Company; but, as stated above, the entire line was operated by the latter company. The Pittsburg Company owned practically all the bonds and securities of the other two companies, amounting to many millions of dollars. All of the property of the Pittsburg Company was mortgaged to the State Trust Company of New York, as trustee, which will hereafter be called the "Trust Company," to secure its outstanding bonds, aggregating several millions of dollars. That on and prior to the 1st day of April, 1899, the Pittsburg Company was in great financial stress, which involved the Shreveport and Ft. Smith Companies. Which condition of the companies caused the stockholders and other interested parties to counsel and negotiate among themselves and others, including the respondents, as how the best interest of all parties could be conserved. After much consultation, it was finally concluded that a reorganization and consolidation of all the companies was the most feasible mode to accomplish that end. That in pursuance of said scheme, on April 1, 1899, Charles E. Grants and others instituted a suit in the circuit court of Jackson county against the Pittsburg Company, it having defaulted in the payment of the installment of interest upon its bonds, due at that time, alleging insolvency, and prayed for the appointment of receivers to take charge of the road. Receivers were appointed, who qualified and took possession of the road and property of the Pittsburg Company. Immediately thereafter ancillary suits were instituted and carried forward to extend the receivership over the entire line of the Pittsburg Company. About the same time an independent suit was instituted in the district court of Caddo Parish, La., for the purpose of extending the receivership over the property of the defendant in the state of Louisiana. That thereafter, on April 6, 1899, the suit which was instituted in the circuit court of Jackson county was removed to the circuit court of the United States for the Western Division of the Western District of Missouri. That on the same day the trust company instituted a suit, in the United States Circuit Court, for the Western Division of Missouri, for the foreclosure of the mortgage against the Pittsburg Company, and for the appointment of receivers. That from and after April 1, 1899, said negotiations were continued, and further negotiations were entered into between the various parties interested in the Pittsburg, Shreveport. Ft. Smith, and the Terminal Companies, looking to, and having for their object, a consolidation of all of the said interests and properties. That up to April 28th all of the suits and proceedings instituted, and had, in all the state courts, affecting all the companies and their properties, were instituted and conducted by the respondents. That on the 28th of April, 1899, as a result of said negotiations, the Trust Company filed an amended bill in its case against the Pittsburg Company, in which the Ft. Smith and the defendant (the Shreveport) companies were made defendants, and the two latter companies entered their appearances by respondents, as their solicitors. Immediately thereafter an ancillary suit was instituted in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Louisiana, which was begun for the purpose of aiding the consummation of the negotiations and plan of reorganization and consolidation begun and carried through and by the said negotiations and foreclosure suit of the Trust Company. Pursuant...