*1 701 attorneys’ including with interest at December recovery, amount of 6% paid, including and all costs the attor- fees. ney court; fees allowed Dunham, In Gibson judgment is against Shugarts entered 327, we held: and in favor of Marshall in the sum of John recovery lien “Sub-contractor’s (his proportionate $156.70 share of the materi- property, for against owner $564.41) with interest at August 6% improve- contractor als furnished paid, 1958 until including and all costs stipulated price ments, limited to is attorney fees allowed the trial court. contractor. with contract in owner’s Judgment affirmed as modified. O.S.1951, 143.” § contract action the the instant In J., HALLEY, terms according to its completed DAVISON, JOHNSON, authority of and under specifications BERRY, JJ., concur. JACKSON plaintiffs’ amount of case, total above fees, can attorneys liens, exclusive $564.11, is the which sum of
exceed price of contract between
difference completion which cost of
$4,100.00 and the entitled is each claimant $3,535.89, and of said share proportionate
only his
$561.41. 176, provides 42 O.S.1961 Title § Evelyn HULL, Error, E. Plaintiff lien, any to enforce an action shall is rendered judgment party for whom HOSPITAL, INC., NEWMAN MEMORIAL attorney’s a reasonable recover be entitled Corporation, Clinic, Oklahoma Shugarts court. to be fixed fee Partnership composed Newman, of F. S. attorney are allowed fees that if contend Newman, M. H. Burgtorf, Joseph fees would that such action the instant Dersch, J. Smith W. H. Defendants contract Error. cost more than the total make the liens are in asserted since the
price and No. 39992. price, attorney fees contract excess Supreme Court of Oklahoma. fixed as costs. can not be Feb. 1963. Shugarts’ contentions were the If As Corrected Feb. 1963. 176, supra, is mean that Sec. it would rule As Amended March 1963. only if an asserted lien is less event, price, then in that contract than the attorney fees allowable amount of than the difference be- be no more
could asserted liens the contract
tween the statutory our do not construe
price. We relating to the enforcement of
provisions hold manner and that the trial in such
liens allowing attorneys’ not err
court did action. the instant
fees judgment the trial court is modi- judgment is entered
fied and in of the L.
Shugarts F. Platt Company in the amount of
Lumber $407.41 proportionate $564.41)
(its share of the *2 for consultation as a
Clinic medical paying patient, with a certain Dr. therein; Richard located Burgtorf that she did medical con- and have see Burg- sultation with said Dr. completion torf, and said visit proceeded to leave the consultation of the said building said structure Hospital its and Clinic principal or main access doors. or principal “That main access point Hospital of said Newman is so constructed that on exiting therefrom, it necessary was on June pass through type one French door constructed of wood frame and foyer into a and thence through door, the outside also of French type constructed of wood and glass out of the building; that the same floor level of waiting room of the clinic extended through doorway foyer inches, approximately ten at which point there a change of floor level drop inches; approximately foyer that said extension into the foyer floor of of the were same painted concrete material and were shade gray; same drop said or change single level drop or change there was no of floor foyer from level to the outside of building; that the distance entering foyer door to the approxi- leading building out feet; mately five of the change in floor level existence Woodward, plain- Hieronymus, drop not known to this or Tom were, tiff in error. date, on said and there McPherren, informative devices Foliart, Shepherd & Okla- other signs in error. City, for defendants this homa to advise posted thereof.
existence PER CURIAM. departing “That structure by plaintiff order of the Appeal way building access sustaining demurrer of the de- above, described plaintiff, this thereto her amended to-wit: fendants care caution using due incumbent any person passing through upon door, proceeded through the said Hospital in- to said Newman went foyer Hills, and imme- In Harrison to said terior door Commander Inc., Okl., through same 298 P.2d held in passing the first through, passing part the act of as *3 change of did, by the reason of allegations “Where of an amended fall, described, drop, above
level or petition fail to state facts sufficient to the balance, plunge and her lose constitute a cause of action in favor of out. set as above said door constructed plaintiff the and defendant the it is not error to sustain a demurrer to collided falling, plaintiff in so petition.” said amended and wood the with the As right petition of her the the not does thereof glass panes state a cause of action in of favor the glass arm broke hand against any defendants, of the the breaking in therein trial cuts, sustaining court was lacera- correct in the de- suffer plaintiff did petition. murrer of the defendants the to to upon and contusions tions and imme- arm; hand, wrist right acknowledges the aid of Su- there- reason Judge pernumerary thereafter CORN the N. S. in pa- preparation opinion. a hospitalized as of After a tenta- of, plaintiff was opinion written, Hospital and tive cause as- the tient of signed to a of this Court. There- eve- the remained and so Justice after, upon report and consideration in 6, 1959.” of ning conference, opinion foregoing the appeal plaintiff contends that her On adopted by this court. petition did state a cause of action amended Affirmed. in and that the court was negligence, in sustaining to defendant’s demurrer in error HALLEY, J., demurrer, since, peti- a the the DAVISON, BERRY, JJ., IRWIN and liberally in construed must be tion concur. question the plaintiff, and since WELCH, jury JACKSON, a and not to one is one WILLIAMS negligence JJ., dissent.. a judge trial de- ruled be murrer. (dissenting). Justice cited and the cases examined have We rule, recognized the well Under a upon by the reversal relied course, plaintiff’s petition, demurrer to they judgment and hold court’s demurrer, purpose for the admitted the facts in this case. to are pleaded allegations well the truth of all petition. I think there are suffi Harman, Tulsa City of petition present allegations cient to held the third Okl. jury determination cause for if all alleged supported the facts are or estab assumes all normal or invitee “The by evidence. Under the lished facts in upon the attendant use ordinary risks rules of law volved and the referred to in the owner or oc- premises, Stores, Taylor, P Inc. &M P. legal duty to recon- under cupant 804, I think the trial court here commit premises so as to alter struct sustaining ted error defendant’s de dangers, and obvious known plaintiff’s obviate petition. murrers I there injury liable for invitee is he nor respectfully fore dissent. danger which was ob- resulting from observed I authorized to state have been am or should WIL-
vious LIAMS, J., concurs care.” in this ordinary view. exercise