100 of the Federal Constitution, that sales the fracionamento of the execution against the Public Farm, are to prevent that exequente uses simultaneously by means of value in addition of the debt, fracionamento or distribution of two systems of satisfaction of the credit, which is, of the solicitation of small value and the precatrio. , Soon reasonable it is to conclude that the constitutional rule is only applied in the cases where the credit exequendo only belongs to a bearer and, being about legal fees borne by the loser in a judicial dispute, pertaining to the lawyer and not to the prevailing party, the rule of 8 of art is not applied. 100 of the CF/88, in view of being ahead of two credits with distinct bearers. However, the fracionamento would only occur and if the lawyer so only intended to receive its legal fees borne by the loser in a judicial dispute, part in solicitation of small value and another part in precatrio. Limiting the lawyer to require the RPV expedition, when its honorary ones had not exceeded to the legal ceiling, he will not have fracionamento some of the execution, exactly that the credit of its customer follows regimen of precatrio. He will not have fracionamento because thus not the execution of independent credits, the example as it occurs in the joinder of parties hypotheses, in view of the total independence of the honorary sucumbenciais in relation to the main credit can be considered. The main bedding of this second chain of thinkers accurately rests in the article 23 and 1 of art. 24 of Law N. 8,906/94, Statute of the Law and the OAB, that, of express form, authorizes to the lawyer in executing its legal fees borne by the loser in a judicial dispute of separate form or in same files of legal documents where they had been fixed, as well as assures to the lawyer the independent right to execute its honorary ones: Art.