Beckjord v. Slusher

California Court of Appeal Sep 28, 1937 No. Civ. No. 11512Published

Before: McComb

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that attorney's fees recoverable as damages under an indemnity bond are limited to the reasonable value of services actually performed, rather than the amount agreed upon between the client and counsel. Furthermore, the court affirmed that a plaintiff is not entitled to recover costs when the judgment amount falls within the jurisdiction of the municipal court.

Issues

Whether attorney's fees recoverable under an indemnity bond are limited to the reasonable value of services performed.
Whether the trial court erred in its instructions to the jury regarding the valuation of legal services.
Whether the trial court erred in striking the plaintiff's cost bill when the judgment amount was within municipal court jurisdiction.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The law is settled that counsel fees which are recoverable as damages resulting from the prosecution of an action for the conversion of property released pursuant to an attachment bond are limited solely to the reasonable value of the services”

“The law is settled that, where the judgment in the superior court is for an amount which could have been awarded by the municipal court, a plaintiff is not entitled to recover his costs.”

McCOMB, J. Plaintiff appeals from:

(1) A judgment for $500 in his favor after trial by jury in an action to recover from defendants as principal and sureties on an indemnity bond.

(2) An order striking his cost bill.

The essential facts are:

Defendant Silas F. Slusher commenced an action in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County against Ben H. Chamberlain and Chauncey W. Chamberlain and attached certain personal property. Plaintiff filed a claim for the release of the attached property, claiming to have a chattel mortgage thereon. Thereafter defendant Silas F. Slusher as principal and his eodefendants as sureties executed and delivered to the sheriff an indemnity bond pursuant to section 2969 of the Civil Code, reading in part as follows:

“Now, Therefore, the condition of this obligation is such that if the said Silas F. Slusher, as principal, and the said Margaret F. Slusher and John J. Doyle, as sureties, their heirs, executors, administrators, shall well and truly indemnify and save harmless him, the said Sheriff and J. G. Beckjord, claiming to be Mortgagee, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, of and from all and every damages, expenses, costs and charges, including all counsel fees for which he, the said Sheriff, and the said J. G. Beckjord, claiming to be Mortgagee, their heirs, executors, administrators or assigns, may incur in consequence of the legal enforcement of the payment of the penalty of this bond, and against all loss and liability which he, the said Sheriff or the said J. G. Beckjord, claiming to be Mortgagee, their heirs, executors, [681]administrators or assigns, shall sustain or in anywise be put to for or by reason of the seizing, levying, taking, retention, disposition or sale by him, the said Sheriff, in said suit, of the property claimed as aforesaid.”

Subsequently in an action on the bond against defendants for conversion plaintiff recovered judgment for $12,500, the value of the converted property, and $2,000 attorney’s fee for services in the superior court. This judgment was affirmed by the District Court of Appeal and a petition for a hearing in the Supreme Court was denied. Defendants then paid plaintiff the sum of $17,500, the amount of the judgment and interest.

Plaintiff paid his counsel $1,000 on account of services before the Appellate Court and agreed to pay a balance of $1500. Demand was thereupon made on defendants to reimburse plaintiff for such fee, which demand defendants refused, but offered plaintiff $500 and no more.

Beckjord v. Slusher

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief