See below siman 54 se'if 18 in the Hagah and in the Sma se'if katan 46.

And if he did so in order to show them esteem, it is fine. Tur. And see the Bach.

See the responsa of Ibn Lev, part three, siman 97.

And the Mahardach wrote that this, that it is only a matter of piety, is where he did so to the dayan not in the presence of his fellow litigant, but in his presence it is certainly forbidden, for his claims will certainly be shut up, and this is easily understood. These are the words of the Sma.

See the responsa of Maharam Padua at the end of siman 40, and see the Ritva at the end of perek HaIsh Mekadesh, and see the Bach and the Sma se'if katan 14.

And the Rambam concludes, and each of them in the presence of the other, and the Magid Mishnah gave a reason for the matter, see there.

And as for payment for a compromise, the Bach wrote that it is permitted to take it, see there.

The same applies where both of them are poor or both wealthy, and the Maharshal wrote that it takes a point in favor of a poor person as the stronger case, since even though the honor of his teacher and the honor of the wealthy person are present. Until here are the words of the Sma. And in the Chiddushei Aggados he did not write so, and see the Bach for what he wrote on this.