Holmes v. Hamburger
This text of 67 Ill. App. 121 (Holmes v. Hamburger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the Court.
The appellant was the solicitor for the wife of the appellee, in a bill filed by her for a divorce. The appellant prepared a petition for alimony and solicitor’s fees, but before anything could be done upon it the husband and wife came together again and refused to pay the appellant for his services.
The suit being still pending, he filed a petition on his own behalf, that the appellee might be compelled to pay him.
With or without the statute of 1874, all orders for alimony or suit money against a husband, party to a divorce suit, are to be in favor of, or for the benefit of—so far as the record shows—the wife herself. Parties supplying her with food, clothes and lodging pendente lite, can not come to the court for compensation.
That his client may prove fickle is one of the risks taken by a lawyer filing a bill for a divorce on behalf of a married woman who has no property. The divorce suit was dismissed by a part of the same order denying him relief.
He had no standing in court, and the order appealed from is affirmed., McCullough v. Murphy, 45 Ill. 256.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
67 Ill. App. 121, 1896 Ill. App. LEXIS 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holmes-v-hamburger-illappct-1896.