Beddo v. United States

28 Ct. Cl. 69, 1893 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 117
CourtUnited States Court of Claims
DecidedJanuary 16, 1893
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 28 Ct. Cl. 69 (Beddo v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Beddo v. United States, 28 Ct. Cl. 69, 1893 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 117 (cc 1893).

Opinion

Bichaedson, Ch. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court:

The only controversies in this case at the present time are among attorneys and others as to the distribution of fees to be allowed, and as to the right to appear as attorneys of record.

The original petition was made and filed March 6,1891, by Joseph Daniels, who died April 12, 1892.

In 1888 said Daniels and Thomas Ball, attorneys of this court, and Isaac B. Hitt, not an attorney of this court, entered into a written agreement for the prosecution of certain Indian depredation claims and to share alike in all fees agreed to be paid by the claimants, which agreement was as follows:

[70]*70“Article of agreement made and entered into this eighth day of Mareb, A. D. 1888, between Thomas Ball, of Behoboth. Church, Northumberland County, Virginia, and J. Daniels. of Washington City, D. O., and Isaac B. Hitt, of Chicago,. Illinois, witnesseth:
“Whereas, said Ball holds powers of atty. and contracts with certain claimants for claims growing out of Indian depredations in the State of Texas, to wit, with C. W. Cooper, C. C. Cooper, Spencer Beavers, A. B. Median, James P. Lindsey, C. L. Carter, D. Cretzinger, J. C. Loving, H. P. Cretzinger, Wm. Beddo, Nathan Watson, H. D. Drum, J. M. Crutchfield, and C. T. Hazelwood, relating to certain claims now pending before the Departments or before Congress, and
“Whereas, said Daniels is associated with said Ball to certain extent in said cases, and
“Whereas, said Hitt has been requested by all of said parties to assist them in these claims and holds the powers of atty. for most of them, and
“ Whereas, said assistance has been rendered and will continue to be by said Hitt, it is understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto, said Ball, Daniels, <& Hitt, that they shall have a common interest in these claims s.o filed by parties above named, and work in harmony for the adjustment of the same, and the fees agreed to be paid by said claimants shall be equally divided between said Ball, Daniels, & Hitt as fast as the same may be collected.
“ Thos. Ball.
“ Isaac B. Hitt.
“ J. Daniels.”

The claimant gave a power of attorney with power of sub stitution to said Ball who substituted said Daniels, by whom this action was commenced.

May 19,1891, Daniels borrowed money of B. W. Perkins, an attorney of this court, upon a written contract as follows:

“ This agreement made this 19th day of Ma.y, 1891, between Hon. B. W. Perkins, of the one part, and Joseph Daniels of the other part, witnesseth: That whereas the said Daniels is engaged in the prosecution of what are known as Indian depredation claims, under the act of Congress approved March 3, 1891, and whereas the said Daniels has up to this date about forty-four cases of this character of claims, aggregating the sum of about two hundred thousand dollars, and upon which claims the Secretary of the Interior has made allowances under the act of March 5,1885, to the amount of about- eighty thousand dollars, as shown by a catalogue of said claims hereto attached; and whereas the said Daniels is desirous of obtaining money for the purpose of enlarging his [71]*71business of collecting and prosecuting claims of this kind, as well as to aid bina in tbe prosecution of bis general business in other claims, and whereas tbe said Perkins is willing to engage in tbe collection and prosecution of said Indian depredation claims, and is willing to advance money for tbe purposes aforesaid:
“ blow, therefore, it is hereby mutually agreed by and between the parties hereto, that the said B. W. Perkins will pay to the said Daniels for the purpose aforesaid, the sum of three thousand dollars as follows, to wit: The sum of eleven hundred dollars in hand, upon the execution of this contract, the balance to be paid as needed and called for by the said Daniels; fifteen hundred dollars of which is to be expended in the collection of new cases; and to be paid as needed for that purpose. The balance to be subject to the order of the said Daniels as he may require the same.
“ And the said Daniels hereby agrees on his part, that the said sum of three thousand dollars, so advanced by the said Perkins, shall be returned to him out of the fees of the said allowed cases, and that he shall have in addition one-fourth of all the fees that may be recovered in the said catalogue of cases hereinbefore mentioned, and one-third of all the fees that shall be recovered in any and all new cases collected with the use of the sum of the said fifteen hundred dollars aforesaid. And the said Daniels further agrees to use his best endeavors and all due diligence in the collection of said claims; and further, if at any time from this- date henceforth it shall appear that the business of collecting said claims can not be made profitable, in the opinion of the said Perkins, then, and in that case, no more money shall be called for by said Daniels for that purpose. And the said Daniels further agrees that all cases collected shall be promptly reported to the said Perkins as fast as they shall be received.
In witness whereof the parties hereto have set their hands on the day and year first above written.
“ B. W. PERKINS.
“Joseph Daniels.”

At the same time said Daniels gave the following memorandum to said Perkins, who has never moved to be entered attorney of record:

“ Washington, D. (3., May 19, 91.
" To whom it may concern:
“ Hon. B. W. Perkins is hereby made associate counsel and attorney of record in all cases of Indian depredations now on file in the Court of Claims in which I am the attorney, or one. of the attorneys, and all certificates relating to fees may be delivered to him.”
“ J. Daniels.”

[72]*72August 24, 1891, Daniels entered into a written agreement with W. W. Martin, an attorney of this court, as follows:

“Memorandum of agreement made this 24th day of August, 1891, between Joseph Daniels, attorney at law, of the city of Washington, in the District of Columbia, and W. W. Martin, of said city, witnesseth:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Pottawatomie Tribe v. United States
227 Ct. Cl. 739 (Court of Claims, 1981)
Godfroy v. United States
467 F.2d 909 (Court of Claims, 1972)
National City Bank of Evansville v. United States
163 F. Supp. 846 (Court of Claims, 1958)
Chickasaw Nation v. United States
121 Ct. Cl. 41 (Court of Claims, 1951)
In re Counsel
32 Ct. Cl. 231 (Court of Claims, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
28 Ct. Cl. 69, 1893 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beddo-v-united-states-cc-1893.