Williams v. Dodge Cnty.

• Decision Date: 07 April 1897
• Citation: 70 N.W. 821,95 Wis. 604
• Parties: WILLIAMS v. DODGE COUNTY.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

95 Wis. 604

70 N.W. 821

WILLIAMS

v.DODGE COUNTY.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

April 7, 1897.

Appeal from circuit court, Dodge county; A. Scott Sloan, Judge.

Action by W. C. Williams against the county of Dodge. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

The plaintiff, in February, 1892, was appointed by the circuit court of Dodge county to assist the district attorney of Dodge county in the prosecution of one Cook, charged with illegal banking. Thereafter Mr. Williams performed extensive and valuable services in such prosecution, and in November, 1892, presented his itemized bill therefor to the county board of Dodge county, amounting in all to $2,640.70. The board referred the bill to Hon. A. Scott Sloan, then judge of the circuit court for Dodge county, who thereafter made a report to the board recommending that Mr. Williams' bill be allowed at the sum of $1,331.75. Judge Sloan reported that, in his opinion, only $15 a day could be allowed under the statute, and it was this change which caused substantially the entire reduction in the bill. Upon this report the county board allowed the bill at $1,331.75 only, and the plaintiff appealed to the circuit court, and the action was referred to Hon. H. W. Sawyer, as referee, to hear, try, and determine. Testimony was received by the referee showing that the plaintiff's services were reasonably worth the amounts charged in his bill, and such testimony was not contradicted. But the referee found--as the fact was--that the plaintiff's bill had never been audited, certified, or allowed by any court, and for that reason was not a legal charge against the defendant county. The findings were confirmed, and judgment against the plaintiff rendered, and the plaintiff appealed.Williams, Jones & Lewis, for appellant.

W. N. Hamilton, for respondent.

WINSLOW, J. (after stating the facts).

The judgment appealed from must be affirmed. The plaintiff was appointed to assist the district attorney under the provisions of chapter 354, Laws 1887 (Sanb. & B. Ann. St. § 752a). This section provides that counsel so appointed “shall be paid in the same manner as is now provided by law for the payment of counsel for indigent criminals.” Section 4713, Rev. St., is the section which provides for the payment of counsel who defend indigent criminals, and the terms of this section are that the county “shall only be liable” to pay such sum as the court in which the services are performed shall, “by an...