#### Marian S. Lindem, Defendant in Error, v. Katharina Sauerland, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 22,072.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John R. Cavebly, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1916.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed May 31, 1917.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Marian S. Lindem, plaintiff, against Katharina Sauerland, defendant, to recover money alleged to be due. To reverse a judgment for plaintiff for $425.18, defendant prosecutes this writ of error.

*16Abstract of the Decision.

1. Attorney and client, § 10 * —when evidence shows attorney to he acting in interests of third person. Evidence held to show that in giving to defendant a receipt in full of plaintiff’s claim the attorney hy whom such receipt was given was not acting in the interests of plaintiff hut of defendant, and that plaintiff was not bound thereby.

2. Attorney and client, § 10*—right to represent adverse litigants. Attorneys at law cannot accept employment from adverse litigants at the same time and in the same controversy.

Zach Hofheimer and Arthur Clements, for plaintiff in error.

P. E. O’Neil, for defendant in error.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Presiding Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.