Case ID: ky-op_2/html/0633-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Judge Peters :", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

George Huston and J. S. Taylor v. J. B. Drury.
    Attorney and Client — Excessive Eee in Divorce Proceedings.
    Though the evidence may show the services of attorneys for the wife, in divorce proceedings, to be worth $300, in the absence of evidence as to the ability of the husband to make such a payment in that the estate is not ample, the court will not reverse the court below for an allowance of only $150.
    APPEAL EROM UNION CIRCUIT COURT.
    
      September 17, 1868.
    James, Huston & Taylor, for appellant.
    
    Hughes¡, for appellee.
    
   Opinion op the Oourt by

Judge Peters :

Upon a joint proceeding of appellants, not being partners, by motion against appelle to recover three hundred dollars for services rendered his wife as her attorneys in defending a suit brought by him against her for divorce; the court below adjudged he should pay them one hundred and fifty dollars, half the amount claimed by them,' and to correct that judgment this appeal is prosecuted.

Whilst appellants have shown by the evidence what the services rendered Mrs. Drury in defending the suit were reasonably worth three hundred dollars, or one hundred and fifty dollars each, still an allowance of three hundred dollars to them against appellee could not be made without a departure from the principle settled by this court in the case of Burgess vs. Burgess, 1st Duvall 287, for which we see no -sufficient reason, especially as the evidence does not show that appellee’s estate is ample.

Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.