The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1905-06-22
OPINION OF
JUSTICE ANDERSON
Cccaeiase4 from Pag OasJ


(Ccucilte1 from Pag C--l
.....+ ----. 4. auction "a .a-t. a- .- ttl.
r- a. rr-...-F. a- -la verdict
,F- s.-.- .-a e..- ..--..--.. -r tes-
----.. -f----.# rtH u-
.---. -.- b. s..t.- -a .- -1-.--g
. .r -rsa that a-r tt--t 90.
f.-.f .- .--r--.r- -e t1. rl.-s at
tae-. f5r- tls1sa-s Ze- V-9 Es--
----.s sa.F e1r.g.1a-- r- 20 re
.s-t .r+aa r1--a--a. H1 r. r-- ia--
,..-. ..-.....e. as. u. ..-a L-F-
r.usg The - s-.us --a- t- i=-
.I.-.-.. ...a 70 ..- Ell -H fa- ss I az
.f- CO.,. -" a- a-l
|...-... ...-.r
r.r ne - i-1-
-.-.- s..- Sand Ht --.-- claimants
were ra -r f.l.a- Claims. ----.
cd .l --.e t-e- a-- ava--sl --s
~ - -f-E u- n
-t.--1-. r-s re- -L=ss -H. IA
-l - f
tt a--.. '-.
... a- l ..t t- .-.--..ta-
aa 70
---. .. ra rs '..- t-al--t--
~
--e -
-
r &
ana . 1-
.H a- r-
l-
I.r
When
..-r claims r t
- @
-
f.r. - ma
gate -4. ~ t
- -.l ..- shea A -
r a---e. -l "-.. Do -a- .-- e.
-s.. ~ ras i-t pass ei .L-.F
fees also rl- --. @ ~ co. res
rr--.-E.F .-r-aa--z --s T- capita
t-ll.-.ll -' t-- t- q. sake
.Ul-g -le.- .lel,.. = t-zt 10 cf-i-
r.srl can D. made because i-e-e men
Inrs-e- that lle pi at'ar. 10 iaeL
ffat Ua- t-a Te-g i--l- Here Nefl
frIr '-l--zl1 men c.aiyf-Ls - =.
rte.r ta--s i-'l 'lf re-.-fs q me
Ul-ef states and '---e -fte--EL- a.
.a-leg -s7l --i-E 'l+.r events
sr T--- -al's are frauds. They
ar. rr rt either one 20 iaese
IsrU-- They proceeded al De- was
f- -.r t--F -1 a1. to .lF--'. gate before
fisf Court a-- l-aa--t fraud and .-
r.la 'l --a Court al--- .-e
sll fad b. .t- services r.lt -el
re Ea.l-. may @ .- .lrr-
rr.af E..- SIS rl-..s- that rl-g
- t H- t.--s I'D u- dollars
rJ tEa- clients
s9 Gar a- zoe -.zs9la.' s-a.s " -a=.r
-cura- -4-lHr l- con .l-l ae-e.
rll .l -sl' -. era
fIa rlsr .- DOT -nf-s- 1et9le ftl'
Tr.- ~ E. -.- and / were called lP
r- .. pass an"r that gr .u-. ethel
"a. . al juror 'fils tg 'rl
flf question lr lot hfsi
fafa fo say that .- the Ash
- fte facts now before .Le Court
.EII.i have -n l.l-I.'t lr concluding
that t1e fees a.lDHeI Ws.L in even
lsg reasonable. This question Ea DIS
.rr-rv rs- lr issue before the cir.
u-l.p court however and that 'elr
Fr.Frz ua--.-I upon the reasonable mes.
e ths fee tEls Cont has lo pow E. %
r--a upon that question.
N .|H ...a. m .N.H' ......
sas distinctly put in issue and thl par
ua5 presented. or had an 0pp0-tUnitl
10 present their evidence and III
question wa, decided by a court o
competent jurisdiction. private r.gh
and public welfare both demand tha
fe question -1 adudiCated sla. -
eap' in direct proceedings for review
l, considered a. finally se'tlet an
conclusive upon the parties
fFayerWea-her SIS R.tCh. l+5 Y.
gigJ
This rule. i- seems To- me, must me-
crsarily b- applied 90 this cas- bt
cause it De- plainly made 20 alpea
ftaf rlp question % compensation va
distinctly and properly put lu isrI'
lnI The mp.airarf and those ha rel
SENT. either resented. or ar ,eas
had ample opportunity tu present. rte.
evidence il opposition thereto. a. we
A. 20 cbt.rt 20 -he jurisdiction % th
CJ-r' 'o consider 'ie natter an. mi
on .H- having been .s .a ny ruu'
....-a.....s..a.# .... #...Hr.