Case Name: Charles B. Phillips v. E. A. Sherburne
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1889-03-13
Citations: 30 Ill. App. 327
Docket Number: 
Parties: Charles B. Phillips v. E. A. Sherburne.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports
Volume: 30
Pages: 327–327

Head Matter:
Charles B. Phillips v. E. A. Sherburne.
Attorney and Client—Assignment—Discharge.
Upon an intervening petition by an attorney to reach a fund in court, in order to secure fees claimed to be due him, it is held: That the evidence sustains the view that the petitioner was discharged from the service of the appellant; and that such discharge did not take away the securitj’, in the form of an assignment, for his fees.
[Opinion filed March 13, 1889.]
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Lorin C. Collins, Judge, presiding.
Mr. John Gibbons, for appellant.
Mr. E. A. Sherburne, in person.

Opinion:
Gary, J.
This is another of the cases in which intervening petitioners have been allowed claims against a fund in court, paid in by the commissioners of the South Park for the use of appellant.
It is conceded that the only question in it not decided in other cases, is upon the withdrawal by the appellee from the prosecution and defense of the eases of the appellant, the claim being for attorney fees. Upon the evidence, it was a question whether that was a voluntary withdrawal or an acceptance of a previous discharge, with a preponderance of the testimony in favor of the latter view. The appellant had assigned $3,000 of the fund to the appellee to secure his fees, and could not take away that security by discharging him.
The case of Morgan v. Roberts, 38 Ill. 65, is not parallel.
Decree affirmed.