The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-06-04
ANGRY OAKLAND LAWYERS.
An Interesting Legal Story That
Is Told in Several At
fidaYitS.
ATTORNEY ALIENS COMMENT.
He Accuses Ex-Judge John Yule of
MeddliJg With His Bust
ness.

The trouble between W. c. Mason and
T. L. White, the confectioners who went
to law about partnership differences, seems
to have been settled, but the attorneys who
were employed in the case have started a
little fight among themselves which threat
ems to develop something startling.
While the case was before the courts the
Judge before whom it was being tried made
some caustic remarks regarding the man
ner in which the matter had been handled,
and particularly regarding Attorney W..
w. Allen, who had been represented as
taking Mr.. Mason's case without the at
torneys who had been previously employed
by that litigant being notified.
Affidavits were filed yesterday by Attor-
neys Holman and Campbell, who first took
the case, and Attorney Allen and his client
White. The latter two were in answer to
the Judges remarks.
Mr.. Aliens affidavit recites that he was
in no way responsible for the settlement of
the case except as acting for Mr.. White,
and then goes on to say:
If had brought about such settlement it
would have been in accordance with the duties
of the profession and the practice OF the attor-
neys of this bar for one of the Leading attorneys
of the Oakland bar, to wit Judge John Yule,
within two months past. went to a client of
mine, took him to his office and made settle
ment for him on the very terms and conditions
which l had proposed without any notice
whatever to me until after it was done, and in
stead of filing the air with filth about him and
disgracing the United States mails by indecent
communications, such as attorneys in this case
boosted in this court they had done, / walked
up to his Office as q gentleman and a lawyer
should do, thanked him for his assistance, aud
there was never word of censure thought OF
for it,
am very sure the court in this case has been
imposed upon or no such remarks would have
been made as were published concerning me,
for am satisfied that this court can certainly
have no personal feelings of spite or animos-
there has never been anything to create such
feeling. l am satisfied that this court does
not desire it understood by the public, the
bench or the bar that it can be used as a means
ears in litigation to crafty the desires OF a
class of attorneys who would be willing to run
! them in the interests of their pockets.
The affidavit closed with the statement
that if the court made the remarks credited
to it, his Honor was mistaken.
T. Is. Whites affidavit states that he, as
plaintiff in the case of White VS.. Allen,
sought and obtained the services of Attor-
ney W. w. Allen to make a settlement
with the defendant for the reason that At
torneys Colin Campbell and Ed A. Hol-
man, who made out the complaint, had not
that at the time it was presented to him he
did not understand its contents, and fur
thermore could not prove its allegations.
His further reasons are set forth as fol-
lows:
After his said attorneys commenced said suit
he became aware that his attorneys were run
ming around after said w. C. Mason to COM
promise, and 1t looked to him as though they
were trying to stand him up in the interest of
some of his competitors in business, and to use
him (the PLAINTIFF for that purpose more than
TO try cause and settle right.
Because they acted in manner which caused
him to lose all confidence in them as attorneys,
and he wanted to get rid of them in order that
he might go to work and earn his living with
out trouble.
MThe affidavit concludes by asserting that
w. w. Allen was employed because the
plaintiff was his friend, had confidence in
him and believed that he would act fairly
in the matter.
The affidavits of Attorneys Campbell
and Holman contained a denial that they
had in any way connived with Whites
business rivals to his disadvantage. They
also stated that they bad read the com
plant to him on two occasions and that he
had seemed to fully understand its con-
tents. They claim to have acted in good
faith throughout their entire connection
with the case, and to be at loss to under
stand why they were not consulted before
the change to which the court took ex-
ception took place.
The matter will be brought to the atten-
ton of the court to-day ard some inter-
esting passages are looked for.
BECAUSE of its much greater strength,