The plaintiff moves to dismiss this appeal because the amount in dispute does not exceed five hundred dollars. The suit is for one thousand dollars against three heirs, who are in possession of the estate, for services as attorney at law by special employment in settling the succession inherited by them, and judgment was asked and granted against them jointly for said sum in proportion to the respective shares received by them.

The claim, as stated, is one against the succession, and the fact that there are several heirs, who must pay proportionately, does not change the nature and amount of the matter in dispute. It grew out of one contract in relation to one matter, the succession of the deceased, which is an entire thing.

The authorities cited by appellee do not apply to a case like this.

It is ordered that the motion be overruled.

dissenting: For the reasons assigned in my dissenting opinion in A. Lartigue v. Eliza White, wife of C. Bullitt et ais., I dissent in this case.

On the Merit's.

The heirs of Mrs. White, wife of Maunsel White, appeal from the judgment condemning them to pay the plaintiff one thousand dollars for professional services.

At the same time the plaintiff was employed to obtain the orders mentioned in the case just decided in the succession of Maunsel White; *292he was employed to obtain similar orders in the succession of Mrs. White, and this controversy arises in reference to the value of these services. As the orders were all obtained without opposition and by consent, we think one hundred dollars will be lair compensation.

It is therefore ordered that the judgment herein be reduced to one hundred dollars, and as thus amended that it be affirmed, appellee paying costs of appeal.

Rehearing refused.