Court Opinion

ID: 9833232
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:33:05.337152+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:00.755624
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
We have carefully gone over the whole case upon the motions for a rehearing presented by both parties, and reached the conclusion that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.
The jury passed, as it was required to do, upon all the items submitted by the court, expendedlas necessaries for Meyer and found in favor of appellees, and we do not feel that we should disturb them.
[10] While the writer has grave doubts as to whether the attorneys’ fees allowed the appellees was a proper charge, the jury has passed upon its reasonableness. In view of the further fact that there has been no authorities presented to show that such was, and in view of the further fact that the majority of this court believe it to be, a proper charge, and the allowance of the attorneys for appellant not a proper charge, the judgment on those issues will not be disturbed.
The claim of appellant Donaldson as shown grows more particularly out of that certain promissory note of November 4, 1918, executed and signed alone by David A. Meyer payable to appellant Donaldson five years after date for $5,000 with 8 per cent, interest per annum with an additional 10 per cent, for attorneys’ fees. It was secured by the described vendor’s lien note payable to David A. Meyer executed by Henry B. Jones, which David A. Meyer delivered to appellant Donaldson as collateral security. As Henry B. Jones was not .bound in any way on that note, there could be no recovery against him. As Meyer delivered the $10,000 note to Donaldson as collateral security, and that note held to be void and illegal, and as there was no independent promise, obligation, or undertaking on the part of Meyer to pay Donaldson any part of the $5,000 note, there was no error in the court’s refusal to grant any relief in favor of Donaldson against Jones.
The motion for rehearing filed by appellee is granted, and the judgment of this court reversing the judgment of the trial court is set aside, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.