The Wallace miner. [volume] (Wallace, Idaho) 1907-current, 1924-01-31
rsdfjia5 u i g i,,'BtsSS ~, s
dlfeged to be due the plaintiff on 'ac-
sssog,fHsR5ii3s2g 2i2g& ,Igl'

n foltowinF Riss dleatfn 39tihg as her at
htornevA III nd6nf6sfihg 1.-THE viii of her
ihusba2nad9 afSf ~ tii9 final adjustment
30}f fh9 Estate, Through which plaintiff
feceiv3P Cash securities and property
Interests valued at $15OO,OOO, John
I'D p. DGray is attorney for Mr.. Hanson.
Q" In his complaint Mr.. Hanson recounts
various phases of the two cases and
his services in connection with the
same He was first employed in June,
1920, as attorney in the divorce suit
which had been instituted in Deem
Der. 1905 Following the death of Mr..
Day Mr.. Hanson says he was engaged
to represent her in securing her right
ful interest in the estate her husband
having ignored her in his viii, leaving
his entire estate to his brothers and
sisters. Another attorney was also
EMPLOYED in Portland. but this the
plaintiff says was separate and not
joint employment
Death Ends Divorce Case.
Plaintiff states that he devoted much
time in preparing for the divorce trial
and that defendants husband and the
DAY family entertained very bitter
feelings toward the divorce case. In
his capacity as attorney it became ne
cessarv for him to investigate the
prperty rights of his client which re-
oiired much time. After completing
preparation for the trial, the judge
who was to hear the case on January
49, 1922. disqualified himself and
-.
r. Day died BY his will he left moth
ing to the widow and designated his
brothers Harry L. Day and jerome j.
Dav executors of the estate. From
that time plaintiff says he gave much
time to investigating property rights
of plaintim and became satisfied that
her interest in the estate had value
of anywhere from one TO two million
dollars.
Would Compromise Divorce.
short time before the death of (
MIR. Day plaintiff alleges that his adj
vice was sought by Agnes Loretta
Dav concerning compromise and final
settlement of said divorce, which had h
been submitted by T. r. Day and his
family first for the sum of 100000
and thereafter for a sum approXim- F,
ately 100000. and upon plaintiffs adj
vice the representatives of said de- Z
ceased and his family were informed s
that Agnes Loretta Day would not !
settle for less than 100000" Ii
Plaintiff states that he attended the a
hearing on proof Of win, and later q
upon filing of voluminous inventory f
of the estate he gave much time in its n
examination and filed many eNcep- III
tons on behalf of his client Ina May {
1922, he alleges that he secured an all v
lowance Of $1,000 per month for his II
client dating from February IL, the d
date of death of her husband, and that v
prior to that time she had received
only $3.50 per month.
Contested Power of Attorney. h
AS further evidence of his services. c
Mr.. Hanson states that he contested n
the power of attorney held by =. }. i
Naggy for e. r. Day, under which Mr.. a
Nfaggy and John II. Wourms under "
look to distribute the property of the Y
deceased among his brothers, sisters, II
lephews and neices, and instituted e.
i'm court to prevent it, al u
30 that he contested the right of Mrs. d
eleanor Day Boyce to the Reeves one Il
sixteenth interest in the Hercules al
nine. From the date of the death OF n
Mr.. Day until the summer of 1928 the le
PLAINTIFF states that he devoted much ID
ime representing the interests Of de Ia
endant. which involved attention to Il
correspondence and re- nI
uired frequent trips 20 Portland. al
spokane. Occur d'Alene and other pl
laces. M
The Widows Winnings. -
Coming down to net results. Mr..
Ianson in his complaint states that ,,
he controversy over The estate was ~,
nally settled in May 1928, and that ~,
nder the terms of the settlement de -.
endant received the sum of $1,000 per ~,
lonth until the 9th day of August, at
l2S: 100000 in cash; an undivided ~,
-16o in the Hercules mine and all of ~,
ne real and personal property of the -
-ercules Mining company, paVtner- "a.
nip: 1927 shares OF the capital stock -,
, the Hecla Mining company; 1854 ~.
lares of the capital stock of the ~
amarack & Custer Consolidated Mi
ing company. all of the value Of APP
not less than a million n.
I'D a half dollars" mr.,
Value of Services Reasonable. VIII
Finally in his complaint Mr. Han an
N states that reasonable value OF his
s services is $4,000 and adds that He
has been paid no sum by defendant his
-cept an expense bill of $500. Judge the
ent is therefore asked for the sum fat
$4,000. with interest from August ing
1928. and for costs. era
his
It makes a lot of difference to man n
neither a girl smiles or laughs at him two