Court Opinion

ID: 9829696
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:32:23.601247+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:04.339681
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Careful consideration of appellant’s motion for rehearing has convinced us that we erred in rendering judgment herein for W. H. Browning for the sum of $1,914, or one-half of the value of the services of both Lewis and Browning, as found by the jury.
 It is obvious that the jury considered the services of both attorneys in arriving at •their verdict on this issue. Whereas the services of H. F. Lewis, he not being entitled to any compensation, should not have been considered in arriving at the value of W. H. Browning’s services. Appellant was entitled' to a finding of the value of the sérvices of W. H. Browning, independent of and apart from any services rendered appellant by Lewis.
Appellant’s motion is therefore granted to this extent: The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the cause remanded as to W. H. Browning, with instructions to the trial court that upon another hearing the only issue to be determined be the reasonable value of the services of W. H. Browning, and that, upon the determination of that issue, judgment be rendered accordingly. In all other respects our former opinion herein is in all things adhered to; and appellant’s motion is in all other respects overruled.
Granted in part, and in part overruled.