| Show LAWYERS SUIT FOR FEES Trlil cf ihi lituti Befircn i furnltur Hot ind Uw frt t iforrla inmer CI k Verdlel In II e Poll TaltVMiretelell Hue III Wire rer Dlvree JuJse Cherry and Jury have l cn culled toJiyilno trial of th liiuei Ivlween Ihe law Arm of thepard Ban ford am th Freed Furniture Carpet rumpany PlilntM In thli cat lued In recover the turn nt tloo alleged lo lie I ilui l f n account of fee for tnklmr B tU to Iho Dial Supreme oourt Tho comMiInt allegrt 1 that In Janu > nry IIM the defendant company employed em-ployed rltlnllfft attorney In Ihe notion ot Patrick I Condon vi llyman A Lelpiigeret al then ending Iinlt nth judicial dlttrlcl Juan county to prepare n1 I k an appeal lo Ine Huprenit lOUr The amount Involve Mil 10 Th appeal Wat heard at thn Heptember term of court and dla tnltted It agulnil Ih defendant 1elp laer 1 It It I furllur alleged that fur the tertlcea n plalntlffa defen Innt wat In pay a Tetmnablo cemt naatlon therefor Tho tervleet wrformed wero the nilng and amulng a motion for anew a-new iNal ptiparlim tervlng and nilng a bill At exception al taking I the appeal preparing abstract ana brief I and ar Kulng Ihe > uno nrally before the Hu preoie courj The reainpubl val Iu oe Ih Ilru Ilnllr 1 0 1 hlh u I I tfl Iho drndnl impany refuted to ixy Tho detendint In aniwer aJlcge1 that IKKI wat exurbltant and that U had rendered pall pUlnllrrt In full for Ihe rI renderednher A nher of leading atlorne w examined behalf nf Ihe plaintiff and ere a ke < l If In Ihelr Judgment Ih urge wer eiccinlte rn Ml liner ere not and on attorney tall the work performed by rlhcpard A Hanford aa worth a lean lisa A concluilo hut not lcn reached when Iho New Tport cloied |
