Hannon

Plaintiffs brought suit against defendant to recover the sum of $7,000, alleged to be due them for services as attorneys in a certain partition action. The amended and supplemental complaint contained two counts, the first in indebitatus assumpsit for the recovery of the amount, and the second alleged in substance an agreement with defendant employing plaintiffs as attorneys in said partition action at a fee to be fixed by the court, the performance of the work for which they were employed, the fixing of a fee of $7,000 by the court for the work done and its nonpayment. The answer consisted of a general denial of the allegations of each count. The court found that all the allegations of the amended and supplemental complaint weré true and that the denials and allegations of the answer thereto were untrue, and rendered judgment for plaintiffs in the sum mentioned. From such judgment this appeal is taken.

Appellant contends (1) that the evidence is insufficient to support the findings and (2) that the court erred in excluding a certain written contract as evidence.

McLaughlin, one of the plaintiffs, testified that defendant came to his office and stated that it was impossible for…