Alexander

The Court below instructed the jury as follows: “ The jury is instructed that if you find from the evidence that the plaint *664 iff rendered the services and incurred the expenses and indebtedness sued for, for Denaveaux & Maison in their suit against Caison & Schmidt, and at the request of the attorneys for said Denaveaux & Maison, then you must find for the plaintiff.”

Part of the services referred to in the instruction were for the expenses incurred by the plaintiff in conducting the business of keeping a restaurant. The circumstances are that Denaveaux & Maison, defendants here, commenced an action against Caison & Schmidt, who were owners and proprietors of a restaurant, and caused a writ of attachment against the property of the latter to be issued. This writ came into the hands of the plaintiff here, who was the Sheriff of the County of Los Angeles, and who levied it upon the restaurant and its stock and fixtures. Subsequently the attorneys of the defendants here (plaintiffs in the attachment suit) instructed the Sheriff (plaintiff here) to keep the restaurant open and conduct its business, which instruction was obeyed by the Sheriff, and the business continued until it…