State ex rel. Bogle v. Superior Court

Citations

• 63 Wash. 96
• 114 P. 905
• 1911 Wash. LEXIS 1163

Syllabus

<p>Stipulations — Construction—Dismissal oe Action — Attorney’s Pees. A stipulation for the dismissal of an action, upon conveyance of part of the property in dispute to trustees, who were to pay to the plaintiff’s attorneys, on account of their contingent fees, “whatever attorney’s fees are allowed or' established in their favor for the party of the second part [plaintiff] in such suit,” does not contemplate that the fees are to be established in the pending case, but means that the fees are to be paid when determined in an action brought for that purpose; as it is distinctly provided that the pending suit shall be dismissed.</p> <p>Courts — Jurisdiction—Consent oe Parties — Record — Stipulation to Dismiss Action — Attorney’s Pees — Prohibition. Where the parties to an action stipulated that it be dismissed upon the conveyance to trustees of part of the property in dispute, the trustees to pay plainiff’s attorneys, on their contingent fees, whatever sum might be allowed or determined in their favor, the court has no jurisdiction in the pending case to determine the amount of the fees without service of process or further pleadings, by reason of the fact that the trustees joined in the stipulation and were present or represented at the hearings, where they did not appear and consent thereto, but objected to the jurisdiction of the court; and prohibition lies to prevent proceedings in the action to determine the amount and enforce payment of the attorney’s fees.</p> <p>Courts — Jurisdiction — Determination — Conclusiveness. The decision of a court that it has jurisdiction to determine the contingent fees of plaintiff’s attorneys is not conclusive, where it was based on statements made to the court and a stipulation for dismissal of the action, and the record shows that the court had no jurisdiction oyer the parties objecting thereto.</p>