Chavez

The original action was one in partition. A final decree was entered therein and provided, among other things, that a certain amount should be allowed the parties as attorneys’ fees, and then proceeded to apportion said amount to the several attorneys in the case, among whom was Waldo M. York, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs, who was given one-fourth of the aggregate amount allowed as counsel fees. After the entry of said final decree, two of the plaintiffs, discovering that an error had been committed therein, were dissatisfied with the decree and immediately took steps to have the same corrected. Waldo M. York and Harry M. Irwin had acted as their attorneys during the pendency of the action. Following their decision to attempt to have the decree corrected, they substituted the said Harry M. Irwin as their attorney in the place of the said Waldó M. York and Harry M. Irwin. They thereupon gave notice of motion to set aside and vacate the decree. The court denied the motion and they have appealed to this court from said order denying their motion.

On this appeal, a brief was filed by Messrs. Sarau & Thompson, attorneys for the said Waldo M. York, and in his behalf,…