Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1913-03-03
~
Photos by American Press Association.

bringing new suit in which defend
ants below become plaintiffs and plain
lifts below become defendants. So far
as (defendanD is concerned, the ques-
ton must be considered as ii she were
asked affirmative relief from a court
whose mandates she has refused to
obey The weight of authority seems
to be that a party in contempt is not
entitled to prosecute or defend an ac-
ton when the nature of his contemptt
is such as to hinder and embarrass
the due course of procedure in the
cause The contempt (of defend
anti affects the due course of proce-
dure IN the case by preventing the
court from enforcing its decree. 80
long therefore, as she remains beyond
the Jurisdiction of the court and has
not purged herself of the contempt
adiudged against her, she can not
maintain a writ of error to review the
correctness of the decree Lindsay VS..
Lindsay, 80 Northeastern Reporter, 6oo.
ETHICS FOR YOUNG LAWYERS.
Divorce and attorneys fees comprise
the subject matter of a recent case,
Szymanski VS. Szymanski, 1873 North
western Reporter, SO. Plaintiff COM
mcnced an action against her husband
for divorce, employing as her attorney
one Brzonkala, a lawyer of three years
practice Defendant, upon being served,
Immediately took steps to effect a
reconciliation with his wife, and stood
ready "to take everything back and
apologize for his conduct" Plaintiff
attorney either opposed this or gave no
aid so the husband and wife settled
their differences between themselves.
Defendant then offered Brzonkala $15
for his fees which he refused on the
ground that his services were worth
more. namely, $3.50. Unable to come to
any settlement with the attorney, the
husband and wife resumed their mar
ital relations, and the wife notified her
attorney to dismiss the divorce suit
He refused to do this but instead filed
the papers against her wishes and APP
piled for and obtained an order requir-
ing defendant to pay him $50. The
supreme court of Wisconsin holds that
SIS was an ample fee, and reverses the
order, with directions to enter an order
of diecontinuance. The court says:
There is some indication in the record
that Mr.. Brzonkala does net quite fully
understand the duties of counsel in a
divorce case This must be attributed
to his youth and inexperience, not to
any fault of character. Such counsel
should promote settlement and recon-
Citation Of parties wherever possible.
even at the sacrifice of his fees when
necessary He should not unnecessarily
make public the domestic discords
which are condoned by the settlement.
There seems to be apparent in this case,
as well as in some others which have
come before us, a notion that any young
gentlemen, two CT three years out OF
law school, has right to charge at
the rate Of $50 per day for his services
because men of age, experience, and
established reputation and capacity to
perform much legal work in one day,
sometimes, or ordinarily. receive that
much. But this is not correct. 1t does
not require long time or great skill to
hear the story OF cruel and inhunan
treatment which forms the basis Of
divorce suit. nor to draft a summons,
complaint. affidavit, and order to show
cause in such an action"
EMBEZZLEMENT.
The following views as 10 the enor-
nifty of the crime OF ernbezzlement in
the case of Ellington VS.. state. 1913 Pa
cific Reporter, 1856. are worthy of no.
tice. The criminal court of appeals of
Oklahoma there says: THE embezzler
OF trust funds is at heart a greater
criminal and a much worse man than
the burglar or the highwayman. The
one poses as a good citizen, and often
steals the livery of heaven to serve the
devil I'M The others come out In their
true colois as thugs and criminals The
one is not only thief, but he is also
a traitor to friends, and violates con-