{
  "id": 3193860,
  "name": "EDWARD I. STEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARY H. FELDMANN, Defendant-Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Stein v. Feldmann",
  "decision_date": "1980-06-18",
  "docket_number": "No. 79-606",
  "first_page": "973",
  "last_page": "975",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "85 Ill. App. 3d 973"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "381 N.E.2d 301",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "303"
        },
        {
          "page": "303"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "64 Ill. App. 3d 256",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3331491
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "259"
        },
        {
          "page": "259"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/64/0256-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "321 N.E.2d 328",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1968,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "335"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "24 Ill. App. 3d 763",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        5309772
      ],
      "year": 1968,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "772"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/24/0763-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "201 N.E.2d 208",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "212"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "51 Ill. App. 2d 260",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5278377
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "268"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/51/0260-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 320,
    "char_count": 4963,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.914,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.352024804076512e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6337471798548873
    },
    "sha256": "8370b11796e880f9f3f09d11d06400f00319d43bf161f848050cf124c51b4314",
    "simhash": "1:affb3cce976935b4",
    "word_count": 796
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:26:52.691366+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "EDWARD I. STEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARY H. FELDMANN, Defendant-Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. JUSTICE RIZZI\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nPlaintiff, Edward Stein, sought to recover attorney\u2019s fees pursuant to an arbitration agreement entered into with defendant, Mary Feldmann. The trial court denied plaintiff\u2019s motion for attorney\u2019s fees and plaintiff appeals. We affirm.\nPlaintiff, an attorney, filed a complaint to recover his fee for representing'defendant in a divorce proceeding. The parties subsequently agreed to submit the matter to arbitration before the Professional Fee Committee of the Chicago Bar Association. An arbitration agreement furnished by the Professional Fee Committee was signed by both parties. Following a hearing, the arbitrators entered an award of $2,399.35 in favor of plaintiff.\nWhen defendant failed to pay the award within the time prescribed in the stipulation between the parties, plaintiff filed a motion in the trial court for judgment in his favor in the amount of $2,399.35. In this motion, plaintiff also requested attorney\u2019s fees and costs pursuant to paragraph 11 of the arbitration agreement which provides:\n\u201cEnforcement of the Award shall be as prescribed by the Uniform Arbitration Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. Chapter 10, Sections 101 to 123). In the event that any party shall be required to apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for inforcement [sic] of the Award, then all court costs and reasonable attorney\u2019s fees incurred in said proceedings shall be included as an additional obligation.\u201d\nDefendant filed a motion to vacate the arbitrators\u2019 award. The trial court denied defendant\u2019s motion and judgment was entered in favor of plaintiff in the amount of $2,399.55.\nOnce this judgment had been entered, plaintiff requested a ruling on his motion for attorney\u2019s fees. In support of this motion, plaintiff\u2019s attorney filed an affidavit detailing the time spent in enforcing the award. No costs were mentioned in the affidavit.\nIn the argument on the motion for attorney\u2019s fees, defendant\u2019s attorney contended that plaintiff had represented himself throughout the proceeding. In response, plaintiff\u2019s attorney stated, \u201cBecause Mr. Stein was able to present the petition to my satisfaction, and I didn\u2019t think it was necessary for' me to say anything because everything resulted in a continuance; so, there was no need to argue any of the merits of the case.\u201d The trial court denied the motion for attorney\u2019s fees and costs.\nPlaintiff argues that the trial court erred in refusing to grant him a hearing to determine attorney\u2019s fees and costs incurred in enforcing the award. A review of the record, however, does not reveal that the trial court refused to grant plaintiff such a hearing. In fact, the record fails to disclose that plaintiff ever specifically requested a hearing. The trial court had before it the affidavit submitted by plaintiff\u2019s attorney. If plaintiff wished to introduce evidence other than that presented in the affidavit, he should have informed the court and demonstrated what the evidence would show. In the absence of any such demonstration, we have no way of determining what the evidence would have been. Since plaintiff failed to request a hearing, he cannot now complain. Cf. La Salle National Bank v. Brodsky (1964), 51 Ill. App. 2d 260, 268, 201 N.E.2d 208, 212.\nThe arbitration agreement in the instant case stated that enforcement of the award was to be as prescribed by the Uniform Arbitration Act. Section 14 of the Act provides that \u201c[c]osts of the application and of the proceedings subsequent thereto, and disbursements may be awarded by the court as to the court seems just.\u201d (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 10, par. 114.) Moreover, the question of attorney\u2019s fees is a matter peculiarly within the province of the trial court (In re Estate of Saperstein (1974), 24 Ill. App. 3d 763, 772, 321 N.E.2d 328, 335), and absent a manifest abuse of discretion, the trial court\u2019s decision will not be disturbed. Aluminum Coil Anodizing Corp. v. First National Bank & Trust Co. (1968), 64 Ill. App. 3d 256, 259, 381 N.E.2d 301, 303.\nThe trial court was in a better position to evaluate the attorney\u2019s fees and costs allegedly incurred in this proceeding. (See Aluminum Coil, 64 Ill. App. 3d 256, 259, 381 N.E.2d at 303.) The court considered the affidavit submitted by plaintiff\u2019s attorney, the arguments of counsel and the circumstances of the case. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court\u2019s conclusion. Consequently, there are no costs or reasonable attorney\u2019s fees to be \u201cincluded as an additional obligation\u201d pursuant to paragraph 11 of the arbitration agreement.\nAccordingly, the order of the trial court denying plaintiff s motion for attorney\u2019s fees is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nMcGILLICUDDY, P. J., and McNAMARA, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. JUSTICE RIZZI"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Louis Z. Grant, of Chicago, for appellant.",
      "Mary H. Feldmann, of Chicago, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "EDWARD I. STEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARY H. FELDMANN, Defendant-Appellee.\nFirst District (3rd Division)\nNo. 79-606\nOpinion filed June 18, 1980.\nLouis Z. Grant, of Chicago, for appellant.\nMary H. Feldmann, of Chicago, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0973-01",
  "first_page_order": 995,
  "last_page_order": 997
}