Stevens & Cagger v. Adams
New York Supreme Court
Counsel fees. The plaintiffs are partners as attorneys and counsellors at law, and this action was brought by them, to recover for the services of Mr. Stevens, as a counsellor, rendered for the defendant, in arguing in the court for the correction of errors, two causes in which the defendant was a party. For those services, the plaintiffs claimed §300. They also claimed §50, for preparing and drawing maps, to be lithographed for the use of the court on the argument.
Read the full summary
Counsel fees. The plaintiffs are partners as attorneys and counsellors at law, and this action was brought by them, to recover for the services of Mr. Stevens, as a counsellor, rendered for the defendant, in arguing in the court for the correction of errors, two causes in which the defendant was a party. For those services, the plaintiffs claimed §300. They also claimed §50, for preparing and drawing maps, to be lithographed for the use of the court on the argument. The-cause was referred and the referees allowed the above charges, with others, together with interest from the time of the…
1Opinion of the CourtCowen, J.
By the Court, I am inclined to think there is enough collectable from the letters which passed between the plaintiffs and the defendant, connected with the other evidence, to warrant the referees in allowing the charge for the map; and they might also infer from the letters, that the defendant was originally willing to pay the counsel fees contained in the account. I do not see any force in the objection that the charge for the map was not allowable in its own nature.
The charge for the counsel fees is resisted as inadmissible, in its full ex-’ *60tent, on the ground that, at common law, no such…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Ma Riojas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1896
- Gray v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1897