State ex rel. Landry v. Morning Star Benevolent Ass'n
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., January 28, 1963 149 So. 2d 157; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., September 17, 1962 144 So. 2d 693; La., November 15, 1867 70 La. Ann. 478
State ex rel. Landry v. Morning Star Benevolent Ass'n, 132 So. 159 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1931).
Cited by
- Armor Research Co. v. Thomaston 563 So. 2d 544 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
- Gore v. American Motorists Ins. Co. 244 So. 2d 894 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
- Mediamolle v. Texas & New Orleans Railroad 176 So. 2d 691 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1965
- Keller Construction Corp. v. George W. McCoy & Co. 138 So. 2d 128 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
- Wilcox v. B. Olinde & Sons Co. 182 So. 149 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1938
- Degeneres v. Pan-American Petroleum Corp. 153 So. 481 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- State ex rel. Sonnenberg v. Board of Com'rs 149 La. 1095
- Melancon's Heirs v. Robichaud's Heirs 19 La. 357
- Knott v. Gough 10 La. Ann. 562
Opinion text
MOUTON, J. Plaintiff obtained the issuance of a mandamus against defendant association to be reinstated in its membership, coupled with a demand in the sum *420 of $110 for doctor’s and drug bills, also for attorney’s fees for $50. Tbe court rendered- judgment for $44 for drugs and doctor’s bills, and for $50 as attorney’s fees, perpetuating tbe writ. In the case of State ex rel. Sonnenberg v. Board of Com’rs, Port of N. O., 149 La. 1095 , 90 So. 417 , tbe court under tbe defense presented, approved tbe commutation of tbe claim for tbe salary of relator with tbe demand for bis reinstatement as an employee of tbe defendant board. It is not contended in defendant’s brief that the court below bad fallen into an error, as a legal proposition, in thus basing its conclusion on tbe ruling in tbe case above cited. Tbe complaint of counsel for defendant’s association is directed principally at tbe allowing of attorney’s fees by tbe trial court, and indirectly to tbe amount decreed of $44 on tbe item for drugs and doctor’s bill. Attorney’s fees are not recoverable when counsel is employed to assert tbe rights of complainant in tbe courts of justice, not being chargeable as costs to tbe party cast. Melancon’s Heirs v. Robichaud’s Heirs, 19 La. 357 ; Knott v. Gough, 10 La. Ann. 562 . Tbe amount claimed for attorney’s fees must therefore be denied. There is no error, however, in tbe amount decreed for tbe drug bill and tbe physician’s services, and none is pointed out by appellant. It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that tbe part of tbe judgment which decrees attorney’s fees be annulled and reversed; that the claim therefor be denied and rejected, and, as thus amended, the judgment be affirmed, appellee to pay tbe cost of this appeal, those below by defendant association.