The San Francisco call., 1904-09-17
HOT ARGUMENT
over BIG FEE
Guardiola Estate Case Con-
cludes With Verbal Duel
Between Opposing Counsel
DEBATE GROWS CAUSTIC
Attorney Lyons Quotes Su-
preme Court and Han
lon Makes Grave Charge
DEBATE GROWS CAUSTIC

Argument was concluded yesterday
before Judge Trout upon the claim of
Bradley & McKinstry for $25, 900 fee
as attorneys TO the Guardiola estate.
The trial of the case consumed many
days of examination of attorneys call
ed for and against the claim. Eleven
lawyers testified, and their valuation
of the services varied considerably,
ranging from $4,000 to 1000.
Judge James NJ. Allen thought $4,000
would be proper and gave his reasons,
specifying the value of the different
elements Of the services. A. Comte,
who Is also a Supervisor, fixed the fee
at from $4,000 to $4,000, while ]. f.
would be good fee. Judge Van Fleet
testified that in his opinion the fee de-
manded was reasonable.
Timothy j. Lyons, arguing for the
daughter of deceased, Mrs. Christobal
of Spain, who is resisting the demand
for the $25, 900 fee, quoted two decisions
of the Supreme Court giving the views
of that tribunal as to the conduct of
attorneys and trial courts in passing
upon fees. These decisions severely re-
buked the legal profession for the will
ingness of its members in testifying
to the correctness of any fee demaAded
by brother attorney and also reflect
ed upon the attitude and action of
trial judges in accepting such teSti-
mony and allowing enormous amounts
to. attorneys against dead mems es-
tates.
In the Blythe case, Justice Garoutte
said: Attorneys are inclined to place
a very high estimate upon the value of
their services when rendered in i'm
portant litigation, and also inclined to
look with kindly eyes and sympathetic
feelings upon the efforts of brother at
torneys in establishing before the court
the value of services performed in
large estates fortunate enough to pos
sess well filed coffers." The court
added that the lower court should
temper this kind of evidence with its
own calm Judgment, based upon the
amount and kind of labor performed"
In a very recent decision (estate of
Byrne) the, Supreme Court, Lyons said,
spoke even more poiptedly as to the
conduct of trial judges in this class of
cases. The decision, Lyons declared,
charged the lower court with being in
the position of a trustee of the estate
and, as such, had mo right to be liberal
with the money of the heirs of the dead
man. and it commented upon the fact
that too often" it had viewed with
grave perturbation the action of trial
judges in allowing enormous fees to
attorneys from moneys over which they
were Will Tile LlBH QullOS VI
trustees" and of it's frequent express
sion of Its extreme regret as to this
manifest abuse"
John M. Burnett, on behalf of the
Archbishop of Spain, supported Lyons
argument He read from another de-
cision of the Supreme Court to the
effect that the trial court should only
allow what any prudent man could get
the services done for. Burnett claimed
that Judge Coffey's decisions of allow
ances to attorneys for twenty-one
years past had virtually established the
proper and customary fees in such
cases and should be considered by
Judge Trout in this case.
Charles F. Hanlon's argument for the
attorneys asking for the fee was SEN
sational. He said there were Judges on
the bench who "fouled'' the judicial
nest" by their attitude against allow
ing attorneys what they asked. He
also spoke severely of attorneys who
resisted brother attorneys in their at
tempts to get fees out of estates and
characterized such conduct as foul
ing" the nest" of the bench as well
as the nest of the bar. These re-,
marks of Hanlon were objected to by
Lyons. who demanded that the names
of the Judges and lawyers be given.
Hanlon refused the demand and Lyons
was unable to get Judge Trout to rule
in favor of his request Lyons says
that when the court reporter tran
scribes the argument he will take pro-
ceedings against Hanlon based upon
this language rejecting on the integ-
rity of the bench and bar.