Court Opinion

ID: 9661473
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 22:39:59.347783+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:28.980271
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
On March 26 we affirmed the judgment of the trial court without discussing the-cross-point of appellee Price seeking to reform the judgment of the district court so as to add thereto $500 as attorney’s fees.. At that time the transcript did not contain a motion for a new trial by appellee in the district court raising the question. How-eve'r appellee Price in his motion for rehearing has again raised the question and accompanies'the motion for rehearing with-, a certified copy of his motion for new trial below in which the point is raised and a motion to supplement the transcript by including such motion therein.
We have examined the motion and find it is in proper form and should be, and it is, granted and the transcript supplemented as prayed. On consideration of th.e-motion for a new trial, we find the record, shows the trial court in his judgment found, as follows;
“Be it Further Remembered that, during; the trial of said cause, the parties, by agreement made in open court, withdrew from the consideration of the jury the issue-as to the applicability and amount of attorney’s fees claimed by plaintiff, and by said stipulation and agreement submitted, the matter to the court without the intervention of the jury. Be it Further Remembered that on this day the issue as to-the attorney’s fees was duly presented toi the court and that plaintiff thereupon stated, that he did not seek attorney’s fees withi respect to that part of the cause of action, arising out of the cutting of the wires-known as “home run” wires and covered, by special issues Nos. 1 through 4 of the verdict of the jury, but that plaintiff did *861seek recovery of attorney’s fees based-on the remainder of the cause of action covered by special issues Nos. 5 to 13 of the verdict of the jury. The court finds as a fact that $500.00 is a- reasonable fee, if allowed by statute, to the plaintiff, Fred O. Price, for the recovery of that amount for which attorney’s fees are sought. The court finds, however, that as a matter of law attorney’s fees, as sought herein, are not recoverable.”
Art. 2226, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St. provides for reasonable attorney’s fees in a case such as the one now before us, and appellee having complied with all the prerequisites necessary to recover such fee and the amount of such fee having been found by the trial court, we must sustain appellee’s cross-point.
Appellee’s motions to amend transcript and for rehearing are granted, and the judgment below is now reformed so as to add thereto a recovery fo.r $500 attorney’s fees, and as so reformed, is affirmed.