Case ID: iowa_75/html/0740-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Rothrock, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Eaton v. Peavy.
    1. Husband and Wife: action foe divorce : husband’s liability for wife’s attorney fees. (Clyde v. Peavy, 74 Iowa, 47, followed).
    
    2. Account: what is : proof of on default. A claim for attorney fees consisting of different items of charges for services, and small disbursements made in the payment of witnesses, and the like, is an account, and in an action thereon, where the petition was verified and a bill of particulars was attached, and defendant made default, judgment was properly entered without further proof of the claim. ( See chap. 36, Laws of 1876).
    
      
      Appeal from Mitchell District Court. — Hon. John B. Cleland, Judge.
    Filed, June 1, 1888
    This action was brought to recover for services as an attorney in defending appellant’s wife in an action for a divorce brought by him against her. A demurrer to the answer was sustained, and a judgment by default for want of answer was entered against the defendant. He appeals.
    
      J. M. Moody and M. M. Browne, for appellant.
    
      W. L. Baton and J. F. Clyde, for appellee.
   Rothrock, J.

— This appeal presents substantially the same questions as are involved in the case of Clyde v. Peary, 74 Iowa, 47, and a citation of that case is all that we deem necessary here. There is this difference in the cases: The demurrer in the present case was directed to the whole answer, and it was sustained generally. The defendant was then in default for answer. The petition was duly verified, and the account for services was attached thereto. Complaint is made because the court rendered judgment without proof of the claim.

Under the provisions of section 1, chapter 36, Laws of 1876 (Miller’s Code, p. 863), no proof was necessary. The action was upon an open account, and the petition was duly verified, and a bill of particulars of said account was attached to the petition, and there was no answer controverting the account. It is insisted by the defendant that the claim is not an account. We think otherwise. It is as plain an action on an account as the action of a merchant for goods sold. It consists of the different items of charges for services, and small disbursements made in the payments of witnesses and the like.

Aeeirmed.