In re Melhado

W.D. Pennsylvania

In re Melhado

1 F. Supp. 591, 1932 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1793

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

DecidedAugust 11, 1932

DocketNo. 16656

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 1 F. Supp. 591 (In re Melhado) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Melhado, 1 F. Supp. 591, 1932 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1793 (W.D. Pa. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHOONMAKER, District Judge.

This case came on to review an order of referee allowing $300 counsel fees to Attorneys A. H. Kaufman and J. Perry Eekles.

These attorneys contend that this allowance is inadequate for the services rendered this estate, in view of the faet that $12,193.-16 was realized from the sale of the assets of the estate. The referee is entirely familiar with the services rendered by these attorneys, and the scale of reasonable attorneys’ fees prevailing in his county; and we are of the opinion that we ought not to disturb his findings, unless they are so patently unjust and inadequate as to require the court to make an additional allowance. We cannot so find in the instant ease, and will therefore confirm the referee’s order.

PER CURIAM.

Now, August 11, 1932, this case came on to be heard on certificate to review an order of the referee fixing the attorney’s fees of A. H. Kaufman and J. Perry Eekles.

On due consideration thereof, it is hereby ordered that the referee’s order fixing their fees at $300 is hereby confirmed and approved.

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

SCHOONMAKER, District Judge.

This case came on to review an order of referee allowing $300 counsel fees to Attorneys A. H. Kaufman and J. Perry Eekles.

These attorneys contend that this allowance is inadequate for the services rendered this estate, in view of the faet that $12,193.-16 was realized from the sale of the assets of the estate. The referee is entirely familiar with the services rendered by these attorneys, and the scale of reasonable attorneys’ fees prevailing in his county; and we are of the opinion that we ought not to disturb his findings, unless they are so patently unjust and inadequate as to require the court to make an additional allowance. We cannot so find in the instant ease, and will therefore confirm the referee’s order.

PER CURIAM.

Now, August 11, 1932, this case came on to be heard on certificate to review an order of the referee fixing the attorney’s fees of A. H. Kaufman and J. Perry Eekles.

On due consideration thereof, it is hereby ordered that the referee’s order fixing their fees at $300 is hereby confirmed and approved.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 F. Supp. 591, 1932 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1793, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-melhado-pawd-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack