Hall v. Reynolds

Eighth Circuit

Hall v. Reynolds

231 F. 946, 146 C.C.A. 142, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 1750

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedMarch 25, 1916

DocketNo. 4497

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 231 F. 946 (Hall v. Reynolds) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hall v. Reynolds, 231 F. 946, 146 C.C.A. 142, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 1750 (8th Cir. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

CARLAND, Circuit Judge.

This case was before the court at a former term on a petition to revise. 224 Fed. 103, 139 C. C. A. 659. It was there held that an appeal was the proper remedy for reviewing the questions sought to be reviewed. The case is now here on appeal.

The appeal is from an order-of the District Court confirming an order of the referee in bankruptcy which allowed Claud D. Hall and S. H. King jointly the sum of $1,000 for legal services rendered by them as attorneys for the petitioning creditors in the matter of the Lewis Publishing Company, a bankrupt, with a further allowance to Mr. Hall of $34.30 for costs advanced by him as such attorney.

We have carefully read the evidence in the record and are of the opinion that the concurring judgment of the referee and the District Court is just and right as to the amount to be allowed to the attorneys named for the services rendered. We are also of the opinion that the court ought not to be called upon to settle differences between counsel as to what proportion of the total amount allowed each should receive. The primary object of bankruptcy proceedings is the distribution of the estate of the bankrupt to his creditors in equal proportions, after the reasonable expenses of administration are paid.

Judgment below affirmed.

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

CARLAND, Circuit Judge.

This case was before the court at a former term on a petition to revise. 224 Fed. 103, 139 C. C. A. 659. It was there held that an appeal was the proper remedy for reviewing the questions sought to be reviewed. The case is now here on appeal.

The appeal is from an order-of the District Court confirming an order of the referee in bankruptcy which allowed Claud D. Hall and S. H. King jointly the sum of $1,000 for legal services rendered by them as attorneys for the petitioning creditors in the matter of the Lewis Publishing Company, a bankrupt, with a further allowance to Mr. Hall of $34.30 for costs advanced by him as such attorney.

We have carefully read the evidence in the record and are of the opinion that the concurring judgment of the referee and the District Court is just and right as to the amount to be allowed to the attorneys named for the services rendered. We are also of the opinion that the court ought not to be called upon to settle differences between counsel as to what proportion of the total amount allowed each should receive. The primary object of bankruptcy proceedings is the distribution of the estate of the bankrupt to his creditors in equal proportions, after the reasonable expenses of administration are paid.

Judgment below affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

231 F. 946, 146 C.C.A. 142, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 1750, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-v-reynolds-ca8-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack