Johnson v. United States

Court of Claims

Johnson v. United States

49 Ct. Cl. 453, 1914 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 162, 1914 WL 1408

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedApril 27, 1914

DocketNo. 29205

StatusPublished

This text of 49 Ct. Cl. 453 (Johnson 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

Johnson v. United States, 49 Ct. Cl. 453, 1914 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 162, 1914 WL 1408 (cc 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Atkinson, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

Claimant was clerk of the United States Circuit and District Courts for the Southern District of Georgia, and institutes this suit to recover the sum of $70 for 14 per diem fees in attendance upon said circuit court, confined exclusively to bankruptcy business, which is authorized by section 2 of the bankruptcy act (30 Stats., 545), which provides that United States district courts are made courts of bankruptcy and are invested with such jurisdiction at [454]*454law and in equity as will enable them to exercise original jurisdiction in bankruptcy proceedings, in vacation in chambers and during their respective terms, as they are now or may be hereafter held to adjudge persons bankrupt. This section amends section 574 of the Revised Statutes by giving the district courts jurisdiction over bankruptcy business as a court of equity, and when such business is transacted the court shall be deemed always open as provided by said section 574, supra. Owen v. United States, 41 C. Cls., 69.

It is shown by a report of the Treasury Department, which is a part of the record in this case, that claimant has already received and has been paid the sum of $3,500 as net personal compensation for his services as such clerk, exclusive of office expenses and mileage, for the calendar year 1905, said net personal compensation being the maximum allowable under the provisions of section 839, Revised Statutes, governing the emoluments of clerks of United States district and circuit courts. This being true, we do not deem it necessary to pass upon the other question raised in this case as to whether one serving as clerk of both the district and circuit courts is entitled to charge per diem fees for business in the circuit court which is required by statute to be transacted in the district court.

We therefore decide that claimant, having already been paid for his services as clerk of the circuit court the maximum amount allowed by law, there is nothing due him from the United States, and his petition must be dismissed.

It is so ordered.

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

Atkinson, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

Claimant was clerk of the United States Circuit and District Courts for the Southern District of Georgia, and institutes this suit to recover the sum of $70 for 14 per diem fees in attendance upon said circuit court, confined exclusively to bankruptcy business, which is authorized by section 2 of the bankruptcy act (30 Stats., 545), which provides that United States district courts are made courts of bankruptcy and are invested with such jurisdiction at [454]*454law and in equity as will enable them to exercise original jurisdiction in bankruptcy proceedings, in vacation in chambers and during their respective terms, as they are now or may be hereafter held to adjudge persons bankrupt. This section amends section 574 of the Revised Statutes by giving the district courts jurisdiction over bankruptcy business as a court of equity, and when such business is transacted the court shall be deemed always open as provided by said section 574, supra. Owen v. United States, 41 C. Cls., 69.

It is shown by a report of the Treasury Department, which is a part of the record in this case, that claimant has already received and has been paid the sum of $3,500 as net personal compensation for his services as such clerk, exclusive of office expenses and mileage, for the calendar year 1905, said net personal compensation being the maximum allowable under the provisions of section 839, Revised Statutes, governing the emoluments of clerks of United States district and circuit courts. This being true, we do not deem it necessary to pass upon the other question raised in this case as to whether one serving as clerk of both the district and circuit courts is entitled to charge per diem fees for business in the circuit court which is required by statute to be transacted in the district court.

We therefore decide that claimant, having already been paid for his services as clerk of the circuit court the maximum amount allowed by law, there is nothing due him from the United States, and his petition must be dismissed.

It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 Ct. Cl. 453, 1914 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 162, 1914 WL 1408, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-united-states-cc-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack