Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

59 Ind. 533

Brown v. Barber

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1877

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1877-11-15

<p>Peomissoby Note. — Attorney’s Fees. — An unconditional stipulation in a promissory note for the payment of attorney’s fees is valid.</p>

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently October 1882

3 state decisions

Relies on Churchman v. Martin

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1877-11-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Worden, J.

¶1— Action by the appellee, against the appellants, upon the following promissory note, viz.:

“ $348yVV Larwill, Ind., April 7, 1876.
“ One day after date, we promise to pay to the order of E. L. Barber three hundred and forty-eight and dollars, value received, without any relief from valuation or appraisement laws, payable at Larwill, Indiana, with interest annually at 10 per cent, per annum until paid, and all costs and attorney’s fees.
(Signed,) “ Peter W. Brown,
“ Henry Brown.”

¶2Judgment for the plaintiff.

¶3The only question made in the cause is, whether the stipulation in the note in regard to attorney’s fees was valid, and, therefore, whether such fees were collectible. The court below held the stipulation valid, and the fees collectible. Such unconditional stipulation was held valid in the case of Churchman v. Martin, 54 Ind. 380.

¶4As the case above cited had not been decided when this *534appeal was taken, we affirm the judgment below, without damages.

¶5The judgment below is affirmed, with costs.

/59/ind/533 · .json · Public domain