In re Fee Agreement of Mason

12 Vet. App. 135, 1999 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 108, 1999 WL 25686
CourtUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
DecidedJanuary 22, 1999
DocketNo. 96-1663
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 12 Vet. App. 135 (In re Fee Agreement of Mason) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Fee Agreement of Mason, 12 Vet. App. 135, 1999 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 108, 1999 WL 25686 (Cal. 1999).

Opinions

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

On December 10, 1996, the appellant, an attorney Vosefski v. Brown, 4 Vet.App. 262 (1993) (mem. dec.), appealed an August 12, 1996, decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) regarding a fee agreement, signed on July 25, 1991, for representation before the Department of Veterans Affairs and this Court in that matter, and that matter is currently pending before the Court. On August 11, 1997, the appellant entered into a fee agreement with another attorney, Kenneth M. Carpenter, to represent him before this Court in challenging the BVA decision. On October 16, 1998, this Court, sua sponte, found certain provisions of the 1997 fee agreement to be in violation of this Court’s precedent. In Matter of Fee Agreement of Mason, 11 Vet.App. 514 (1998) (per curiam order). The Court ordered that this case be held in abeyance and that the appellant file a revised fee agreement that com[136]*136plied with the rule in Shaw v. Gober, 10 Vet.App. 498, 505-06 (1997).

On October 23, 1998, counsel Carpenter filed an amended fee agreement, which had been signed on October 22, 1998, by the two attorneys. Upon further consideration of this matter, because the fee agreement in this' case is an agreement between two attorneys, the Court will not review it further, see 134 Cong. Reo. 31469-70 (1988) (statement of Sen. Cranston) (Court review of fee agreements for “reasonableness” under 38 U.S.C. § 7263 “provide[s] protection [to Department of Veterans Affairs claimants] against any overreaching on the part of attorneys” ), and will lift the stay imposed by the Court’s October 16,1998, order.

On consideration of the foregoing, it is

ORDERED that the stay imposed by the Court’s October 16,1998, order is lifted.

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

Related

Carpenter v. Principi
15 Vet. App. 64 (Veterans Claims, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 Vet. App. 135, 1999 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 108, 1999 WL 25686, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-fee-agreement-of-mason-cavc-1999.