
    No. 4721.
    E. Hiestand vs. the City of New Orleans.
    By section five ol act No. 175 of tho acts of 1859 the assistant city attorney was entitled to recover live nor cent commissions on judgments when tho amounts thereof have boon collected and actually paid into tho treasury. On uncollected judgments for taxes plaintiff is not, thoroforo, entitled to recover the commissions he claims.
    Plaintiff is not entitled to commissions on tho bills for city licenses eolloetod by the • city treasure)- subsequent to the first day of February, 18.08, assuming that on that day it became tho duty of the city treasurer, under the charter of 1850, to turn over to him said bills for collection. As plaintiff did not perform any services, he is not entitled to remuneration.
    APPEAL from the Superior District Court, parish of Orleans. Lmu-mont, judge of the Fifth District Court, where tho case was tried and judgment rendered before being transferred to the Superior District Court, which granted the appeal.
    
      John H. Isley and A. & W. Voorhies, for plaintiff and appellee.
    
      B. F. Jonas, for defendant and appellant.
   "Wyly, J.

Plaintiff sues tho defendant for $26,750, the amount of commissions he alleges the city owes him as assistant city attorney in 1868 on certain judgments for taxes which remain uncollected; also, the amount of his commissions on certain bills for licenses which the city treasurer retained in his hands after the first day of February, 1868, and collected between said date and the first day of July thereafter.

The case -was tried in the Fifth District Court before it was transferred to the Superior District Court, and the result was a judgment for plaintiff for 525,641 76. Defendant appealed.

By section ñve of act No. 175 of the acts of 1859 the.assistant city Attorney was entitled to recover five per cent commission on judgments when the, amounts thereof have been collected and actually paid into the treasury. 18 An. 666. On uncollected judgments for taxes plaintiff is not, therefore, entitled to recover the commissions claimed.

Plaintiff is not entitled to commissions on the bills for city licenses collected by the city treasurer subsequent to the first day of February, 1868, assuming that on that day it became thé cluty of the city treasure]', under the charter of 1856, to turn over to him said bills for collection. As plaintiff did not perform the services, he is not entitled to remunera-: tion.

It is therefore ordered that the judgment herein be annulled, and that plaintiff’s demand be rejected with costs of both courts.

Rehearing refused.  