Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1912-01-30

DAILY Va
naa purchased the interest Of Child,
ana Barker, comenced a suit in m,
name OF defendant against Child,
ana Barker to quiet the title, veri
lying the complaint himself and we'll.
knowing when he filed the complains
that the title was clear
There was also pleaded a defense
that the agreement was champertous
and' therefore, illegal and void and
aiso that it was obtained by fraudu-
lent misrepresentat'Ons as to the
value of the property.
All the new matter in the answar
having been put at issue by replv
tne cause was heavd and the court
made the following findings of facts.
FIRST That plaintiff, after the ex-
ecution of the contract referred to in
the pleadings herein, delayed the
commencement of the suit agreed by
MN to be brought for defendant:
That said delay was occasioned
through plaintiffs desire to inform
himself more particularly as to
plaintiffs defendant here) title to
said real property forming the sub
1ect OF said proposed suit.
Second: That plaintiff was mot
negligent in the prosecution of said
suit.
Third That the value of said real
property referred to in the complaint
herein at the time of the said con-
tract being entered into between
plaintiff and defendant was approxi-
mately $500.
Fourth; That the opinion given by
plaintiff to defendant at said time
that said real property was of the
probable value of $500 was not frau
dulently given, nor did the plaintiff
intend to deceive or cheat defendant
in said matter.
Fifth: That plaintiff agreed to
bear the expenses of said litigation
except IS advanceS by defendant.
Sixth: That before any suit was
commenced by plaintiff in pursuance
with said contract. defendant through
her agent notified plaintiff not to
commence said suit; that said mat
ter was in process Of settlement.
Seventh: That said controversy
was settled without suit by payment
by defendant Of $1OO and by plaintiff
of $42 in redemption of said real
from sale thereof for taxes"
Based upon these facts, the court
made the following conclusions of
law:
First. That after making the said
contract with the plaintiff 1t was
within the power of the defendant to
settle said controversy in relation to
which plaintiff had been retained as
attorney.
Second. That in the event of such
settlement made in good faith with
out the intent of defraudlng plain
tiff, plaintiff is not entitled to a de-
Gee of specific performance as for a
contract the terms of which have
been performed on his part
Third That the complaint herein
should be dismissed with costs to !
defendant"
Thereupon a decree was entered in
'avor of defendant dismissing the
suit and plaintiff appeals to this
,ourt.
Upon the hearing here the court
affirmed the decree and findings of
he circuit court. The decree Is as
ollows: "This cause having, on the
10th day of November, 1909, been
July tried, argued and submitted to
he court upon and concerning all
he questions arising upon the tran
icript, record and evidence, and then
'eserved for further consideration.
And the court having duly considered
I'll the said questions, as well as the
made by counsel in their
lrgument and briefs, finds that there
s not error as alleged. It is there
ore ordered and adiudged and de-
reed by the court that the decree
Il the court below in this cause rem
Iered and entered be and the same
s, in all things, affirmed. And the
ourt having considered the evidence
nd the findings Of fact made by the
,ourt below In this cause, finds that
he said findings Of fact made by
he court below in this cause, finds
hat the said findings are correct, and
IRE sustained by the evidence, and
hat the exclusions Of law are cor
eotly deduced in 'ts conclusions Of
aw therefrom, It is ordered by the
:ourt that the findings of fact and
conclusions Of law made and found
n the court below in this cause be
Idopted and found in this court as
uch. And based thereon, and upon
he whole record in this cause, It is