Special Bank Commissioners v. Cranston Savings Bank

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Special Bank Commissioners v. Cranston Savings Bank

12 R.I. 497, 1880 R.I. LEXIS 8

DecidedJanuary 26, 1880

StatusPublished

This text of 12 R.I. 497 (Special Bank Commissioners v. Cranston Savings Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Special Bank Commissioners v. Cranston Savings Bank, 12 R.I. 497, 1880 R.I. LEXIS 8 (R.I. 1880).

Pincite

Opinion

Pep Curiam.

The master’s report is modified by reducing the amount to be allowed the receiver, for compensation for services for three years and fourteen days, ending January 1, 1877, to $16,000, and the report, as so modified, is confirmed. The court allows the master $1,000 for his services. The court is of the opinion that $500 would have been ample compensation for such services as the master was expected to perform. He was not appointed to do the work of an expert, or detective accountant, but to examine judicially as a master, and report on the matters committed to him by the decree. Of course, if in his examination he had found anything suspicious, which, however, he did not, it might have been proper for him to apply to the court for authority to employ an accountant. The master, however, acting under a misapprehension, performed this labor, though apparently unnecessary, himself, and as he seems to have acted honestly, and as his labor was quite severe, the court has come to the conclusion, though somewhat reluctantly, *503 to allow him for it, at the rate at which it could have been procured from a competent accountant. Order accordingly.

Charles Hart, for the receiver. Abraham Payne, for the master. Joseph T. Snow others, committee of excepting depositors, pro se ipsis.

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

Pep Curiam.

The master’s report is modified by reducing the amount to be allowed the receiver, for compensation for services for three years and fourteen days, ending January 1, 1877, to $16,000, and the report, as so modified, is confirmed. The court allows the master $1,000 for his services. The court is of the opinion that $500 would have been ample compensation for such services as the master was expected to perform. He was not appointed to do the work of an expert, or detective accountant, but to examine judicially as a master, and report on the matters committed to him by the decree. Of course, if in his examination he had found anything suspicious, which, however, he did not, it might have been proper for him to apply to the court for authority to employ an accountant. The master, however, acting under a misapprehension, performed this labor, though apparently unnecessary, himself, and as he seems to have acted honestly, and as his labor was quite severe, the court has come to the conclusion, though somewhat reluctantly, *503 to allow him for it, at the rate at which it could have been procured from a competent accountant. Order accordingly.

Charles Hart, for the receiver. Abraham Payne, for the master. Joseph T. Snow others, committee of excepting depositors, pro se ipsis.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 R.I. 497, 1880 R.I. LEXIS 8, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/special-bank-commissioners-v-cranston-savings-bank-ri-1880.