Case Name: Mary Clendinen, Administratrix of R. Clendinen, v. John Black, and Robert Brown; Same v. Felix Robinson
Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1831-06
Citations: 2 Bail. 488
Docket Number: 
Parties: Mary Clendinen, Administratrix of R. Clendinen, v. John Black, and Robert Brown. Same v. Felix Robinson.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Law Reports
Volume: 18
Pages: 488–489

Head Matter:
Mary Clendinen, Administratrix of R. Clendinen, v. John Black, and Robert Brown. Same v. Felix Robinson.
A promissory note, given, as a fee, to a Solicitor in Equity, for managing a suit in Equity, may be apportioned, where the solicitor died before the termination of the suit; and his representatives will he limited to the recovery of such proportion of the amount 'of the note, as the services actually rendered bear to the whole, which were to be performed in consideration of the note.
Tried before Mr. Justice Earle, Spring Term, 1831.
These were suits by summary process, brought, the first of them at York, the other at Chester, upon promissory notes, given by the defendants, respectively, to the plaintiff’s intestate, a solicitor of the Court of Equity, as fees for professional services. The note in the first' case was given for defending a suit in Equity: and it appeared, that the intestate filed the answer of his clients, and attended at the ensuing term, when, on the first hearing, an order was made for reference of the cause to the commissioner, but died before the report and final hearing. In the other case, the note was for prosecuting an injunction suit: and it was admitted, that the intestate had filed the bill, and obtained an injunction, but died before the final hearing; in consequence of which the client was compelled to retain other counsel. In both cases, it was contended for the defendants, that the amount of the notes should be apportioned, and the plaintiff limited in the recovery to the proportionate value of the services actually performed.
The presiding Judge was of opinion, that as the notes,were given for counsel-fees, and not for costs which might be taxed, or for other services which were divisible • in their nature, the plaintiff was intitled to recover the whole: and he made decrees ' accordingly, in both cases.
The defendants now moved to set aside the decrees, as contrary to law.
Eaves, for the motion.

Opinion:
O'Neall, J.
delivered the opinion of the Court.
Ba®ot »• 424.
The rule once was, that a counsel fee was a mere gratuity ; and therefore, unless the client thought proper to pay it, none was recoverable. But, in this State, it has long been settled, that an attorney is intitled to recover for his services in managing a suit, as much as they were worth, (1 M'C. 149 ) And this is always regulated by the amount usually paid in similar cases as a counsel fee. The notes, on which these actions were brought, were given as compensation to the late Mr. Clendinen,for services which he undertook to perform as a solicitor in Equity. They were given in place of the amount, which he would otherwise have been intitled to charge for his services, after they had been rendered: and they may be likened to a contract of hiring. the deceased had in his life time abandoned his clients' cases, he could not have recovered on these notes : but his death was the act of God, by which his clients have been deprived of his future services; and, for his services rendered, they must pay as much as they were worth.' Taking each of these notes as the value of the whole of the services which he was to have rendered to the defendants, the decrees should have been for the plaintiff, for such a proportion of their amount, as the services actually rendered bore to the whole, whieh were to be performed in consideration of the notes. The motion to set aside the decrees, is granted, and new trials are awarded.
Motion granted.