Boyd v. Lee

Citations

• 36 S.C. 19
• 15 S.E. 332
• 1892 S.C. LEXIS 77

Syllabus

<p>1. Counsel Fees. — The court cannot enforce the payment of counsel fees between parties sui juris, in the absence of an agreement, express or implied.</p> <p>2. Ibid. — -Lien.—An attorney has no lien or claim on the judgment for his fees in recovering it.</p> <p>3. Scope op Reference. — After judgment rendered, a disagreement arose between counsel and client, and an order was passed substituting other counsel, and referring it to a referee to ascertain and report what was the agreement between client and her counsel as to his fee for his services as her attorney in the proceedings, so that the court might determine the rights of the parties. The referee reported that there was no definite agreement, but that 20 per cent, would be a reasonable compensation. Held, that the only matter submitted to the referee was whether-there was an agreement, and his finding as to a reasonable compensation was not within the scope of the reference. Ilis finding as to there being no agreement, approved by the Circuit Judge, affirmed.</p> <p>4. Orders in Open Court — Jurisdiction.—Such an order of substitution and reference, passed in open court and not appealed from, is binding on the client, except in so far as it involved the jurisdictional right of passing without notice an order not contemplated by the action to which she was a party.</p> <p>5. Resisting Referee's Report — Exceptions.—A party may be heard in opposition to a referee’s report, without exceptions taken, where the “Casé” does not show service or notice of the report.</p> <p>6. Grounds of Appeal on rulings not necessary to the judgment, not considered.</p> <p>7. Substitution of Counsel. — The court may impose restrictions on the substitution of counsel, but in this case the only restriction imposed proved unavailing to the client, as it was found that no contract existed.</p>