Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1900-06-07
.lHAMPERTY CASE
IS HEARD TODAY
-. Of Evans and Rogers Before
SoDrsne Court on Demurrer
IVGUNENTS OF ATTORNEYS
.,, taken Under Amusement,
should Demurrer be sustained
proceedings WIN End


r. petition Of Attorney r. l.. VIII
= filed a couple Of weeks ago,
.-rpg Attorneys David Evans and
-,.y r. Rogers with having made a
,-Dsrtous contract with one Thomas
rs and asking that the names OF
reused attorneys be STRICKEN from
4 pn. Of practitioners in the courts
r,h came up before the Supreme
today on demurrer. Assistant
,rey General w. A. Lee. Judge
raj and +. S. Richards appeared in
In Of the state, and Judge Powers
scented Attorney Rogers, while At
NJ Evans appeared in his own be-
|.re little time was consumed after
convened IN determining how TO
ed In the absence OF any ar
enent between the attorneys
Justice Bartch directed that
,,l proceed on the demurrer to the
4 ,-atlon filed by Attorney Williams.
mr. EVANS ARGUMENT.
'larney Evans was the first 20 ad-
he court He started out by say
hat he regretted having TO appear
h. case. IN view OF the fact that he
grsonauy concerned. He had con-
4 IA with a law firm with a view OF
ME- lis members 90 represent him,
4 bling otherwise engaged they were
. y 20 be- present He then pro-
a 90 say that inasmuch as the
~ had come up on demurrer II
necessary to refer to the statutes.
PETITION and AFFIDAVIT filed by
4 sn Williams and Nelson stripped
Il hr yerbiage charged him and Mr..
sm with having made champer-
untnct contrary 20 law. What
4 vas not stated, but he took 1t for
nd that the petitioners referred
b. Old common law. He called the
- attention 20 the fact that the
b ration dld not charge champerty.
ged The maNlg VI a champertous
aeL which was a different mat
+ Entirely The statutes were silent
champertous contracts Barratry
defined by the statutes, but that
where an attorney went around stir
n % matters and seeking 10 bring
court a "gr0undless case" Most
e were ignorant OF the meaning Of
[liefty The publicity given the
afddngs now under consideration
caused many Of his friends 10
Dong that he was charged with a
ls crime Some of his relatives
said 10 him why Dave,
y have you been doing? / see by
A plleS that you are going to be
for scamperty'"
q attorney could become So craven
% immoral as to render him unfit
member Of the bar and yet he
~ hot BE- violating any law. He
'uIed 90 find a decision where a
~ had been disbarred for making
anpetous contract The petition
noi state that the making Of the
Iad between respondents and Mr..
a involved moral turpitude, and
'aa' reason failed to allege a cause
u9a a lawyer had the right to
advantage Of things that any
hen could and not be liable to
iIn.nl unless he failed 20 keep
. ne law Two lawyers make a
4 = horse race. The one that
4 segilnes 90 pay and he is sued.
yheI cannot recover. In a court
i.lE Ar Evans quoted and read
numerous authorities, and In con-
4 ( @ld he hoped justice would be
pun ana his former partner. Mr..
Attorney GENERAL LEE.
's'ant Attorney General w. A.
z. "a me State. followed Mr.. Evans.
~ lhe court had already found
w contract made between Messrs.
ana Rogers and Nelson was
-I'ous To had also been held by
s.-ll ~ NE case OF Croco VS. ore
t-9i' Line Railway. that the COM
4 ~, as applied 10 champertv, was !
\ a. tne time OF the adoption OF /
4 s,',lulio1 and that q contract |
~ an attorney is 10 pay the court |
" d SUI Us a champertous con-
s-Illhg said Mr.. Lee. that the l
,s aied ln this case is the law |
4 ~, ~ 20 ne case az bar, 10 the ex-
! s,,. . ioi ne purposes OF this case |
rs ..slrl that respondents as such |
80 thlefel into a champertous
lhe further question remains |
n 's.uef or not the making Of |
"nifact would constitute a |
49, tIound for the disbarment |
4 t,.4tsloh ~ respondents.
I n - from the language used |
l any, 'ull 10 Cr0co w 0. S. L. Ry. !
\ IN. Supfa' on page 1922 thereof. |
An s9url is not disposed 10 apply |
sYls,s, mperty with the rigor |
\ n an. curing earlier time. As
u s ss and Sons co. vs. Jones.
Il an, lhe peculiar state of sos
\ ", which such law grew! |
V,,e 70 most absurd extremes: |
b. ~ n sl indictable for aiding a
|.yios tlil lawyer, for loaning
n y. Trend 20 ylndlcate his legal 1
i 81, -,.lefing 10 voluntarily testi-
4 dcAsritys anu IuiI IAN and ! other like Of
Va COURT TO DETERMINE.
. tu,so6n lIact In question havins
p nm W De chainpertous. Il re-
ben !, lnis court 20 determine
ban, ue' the execution and con-
D ibs ~, ~ a champertous contrac,
|ns5 ,yollltIons and clrcumstances
Rltu,. ~ nave existed In this case /
(sns,,a sufficient ground for Inc
of al suspension from their
.naeb,s neys OF this court Of the
.rou15H q y, sets forth Eve dis
BISON y, Tor the dlsbarment or
and ~ pr9cticlng attorney The
II forn Delng a generalization
p certsi r'sr grounds mentioned.
|iauts az, ,l grounds are specined b,
eiClude , s,.a Il does not necessar.
: noi ,s,,'S,ing from the rolls for
eons,r,' sSt'led- A statute Is not
as restrictive Of the