Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

DOMINIC SINISI et ux., complainants-appellants, v. JOHN MILTON,defendant-respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The bill prayed a review by the court of chancery of fees and disbursements charged by the defendant against complainants in the matter of condemnation of their real estate, including trial of the issue before the commissioners, of an appeal to the circuit court, and a further appeal to this court. The gravamen of the bill of complaint was that the charges of Mr. Milton for his services were excessive and should be materially cut down and he be decreed to refund the excess out of moneys collected on account of the award. The defendant joined in the prayer for an adjudication on the amount of the charges. The vice-chancellor, on a careful examination of the matter, filed a memorandum (not reported) holding that the charges were not unreasonable, and in that conclusion we concur. The bill was properly dismissed and the decree brought up will therefore be affirmed.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, JJ. 11.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SINISI v. MILTON
(Oct 20, 1930)