Decision no. ... in the matter of fixing reasonable fees for attorneys or agents under the authority of Section 9 of the...

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Decision no. ... in the matter of fixing reasonable fees for attorneys or agents under the authority of Section 9 of the "Settlement of War Claims Act of 1928."
At head of title:
American Commissioner
Physical Description:
v. : ; 23 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Mixed Claims Commission, United States and Germany
Publisher:
U.S. G.P.O.
Place of Publication:
Washington, D.C
Publication Date:
Frequency:
completely irregular

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
World War, 1914-1918 -- Claims -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Claims vs. Germany -- Periodicals -- United States   ( lcsh )
Genre:
serial   ( sobekcm )

Notes

Dates or Sequential Designation:
No. 1 -
General Note:
Title from cover.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 004822591
oclc - 50038280
System ID:
AA00008543:00027

Full Text

* r:. .: .





I.~


kr:




": C;..
4L.


THE


AMERICAN


COMMISSIONER


1.4
'VainF
rt
F~NIH..
I~B~ll:'
.--.9:.
r-!.. ...

Pih
e.

WI.:...
-:
~er4~






I':


MIXED CLAIMS COMMISSION


UNITED STATES AND GERMANY


DECISION NO. 63


IN THE MATTER OF


FIXING


REASONABLE


FEES


FOR


ATTORNEYS


AGENTS UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF SECTION 9 OF


THE


" SETTLEMENT OF WAR CLAIMS ACT OF 1928 "


DOCKET NO. 4700


Va


a.
-


I,'
.91 ,....AH'


'C~..
rip:
I..


Charles C. Bobart, Claimar ,t


Lewis Arthw ur McGouwn., Attorney


CHANDLER P. ANDERSON

America'n Commnissio ner


OR


63



































MIXED


CLAIMS


COMMISSION


UNITED


STATES


AND


GERMANY


Established in pursuance of the Agreement between the
United States and Germany of August 10, 1922


CHANDLER P


ANDERSON


Americaan ommuisioner


;jB~i~


"; :19i
i""E













THE AME

MIXED

UNITED


RICAN


CLAIMS

STATES


COMMISSIONER

COMMISSION


AND


GERMANY


DECISION NO. 63

IN THE MATTER OF


FIXING


REASONABLE


FEES


FOR


ATTORNEYS


OR


AGENTS UNDER THE AUTHORITY


OF SECTION 9 OF


THE SETTLEMENT OF WAR CLAIMS ACT OF 1928"


DOCKET NO.


Charles C. Bobacrt


Le wis Ard thIuo


4700


Clai man.t


McGowan., Attorney


October


1928, the


above


named


claimant


filed


with


American Commissioner a written request that he fix a reasonable
fee to be paid by him to his attorney, Lewis Arthur McGowan, of
Washington, D. C., as compensation for whatever services have been
rendered by him on behalf of and with the authority of the claimant,
,such services being of the character described in the provisions of
.Section 9 of the Settlement of War Claims Act of 1928 ".


I;
I.
:'V
411k:




* W rT -w mr


412


Commissioner made the


following rulingi


17, 1929, addressed to the attorney:

I have received your letter of January 7th
filed any information at all showing the reu


g, in a letter dated January


informing me that you have not


asonableness


of the


fee asked


you in the proceeding pending before me in the matter of the claim of Charles


C. Bobart
mailed on


(Docket No.


4700)


April


because you felt


performed


my duty


n sending
under


out the notice


the law


that


respect and,


therefore,


that I


would eventually rule


the matter


of fixing


your fee was outside of my jurisdiction through the failure of the claimant to


file within


the prescribed


ninety-day


period


after


that


notice


was


mailed


request that I fix a reasonable fee.
Under the provisions of Clause


of Section 9 of the


" Settlement of War


Claims Act of 1928," I am authorized and requested to ma


to each claimant,


on whose


behalf


an award


was


made


the Mi


Claims


Commission


notice
stated,
notice


of the provisions


such


was


a notice


addressed


of Section


was


sent


9 of


registered


to the claimant


return receipt card from the Postmaster


you r
io~~ed


mail
care,


case,


on April


as above


1928.


the registered


this notice was


This
mail


received


at your office on April 5, 1928.


forwarded


It appears,


to the claimant in


time


however
for him


, that
to file


notice was not


his request within


the prescribed ninety-day period.


In mailing


this notice


to the claimant


your


care


relied


upon


forward


it to him


as was


done


other


attorneys


a number


similar


cases.


You state in


your


letter to


me of November


1928,


that,


when


conferred with


the claimant with


reference


to tl


\e payment


your


fee, you


banded this notice to him personally at his home, t


imt he e


samined


it in your


presence and


then returned it


you.


further


s'Lute


the claimant's


information
War Claims


about
Act


his privilege


)f 1928"


under


to request me


pro v


to fi


sons


of the Settlement


a reasonable


to be paid


to you came from the discussion you had with


him at


home.


It further appears from your previous letter to me of October 25, 1928,


that


conference


with


the claimant


at which


handed


notice


which was the source of his information regarding th
did not take place until July, because you state that


aese fee fi


Wraite


sing proceedings
Md until July for


- 1-


____ *.


'----- ,


13@ LA w*adare wwath 5 17T/5WS 1
-
1


- a


2 -1


mi, ,r,!,,,, L


qE 8








413


"The only addresses available


for the mailing


these notices


were those


on file


with


the Agent


for the United


States


before


Commission,


many


of which were inadequate and some of which


were in


the care of the attorn


who had appeared for the claimant,


notice to the claimant.


and who in some


It subsequently


cases


appeal red


failed to forward the


for these reasons some


of the claimants did not actually


receive


notice


time


to file with


American Commissioner,


within the ninety-day period after the date of mailing


as required by


the Act. a


request


to have


In these


cases,


certain


other


cases


where


the notice


not reached


claimant


promptly


there


been


no laches or


igence


on the


part


of the claimant


responding to


the notice,


the American


Co1 Uninli


ouer


held


that the


con-


templa ted


the mailiu


the notice


to the claimants at


an add


ress


throu gh


which


it would be received by them, and


he caused to


be mailed a new


notice


direct to tl


ie claimant's


address when such address was ascertained


in order to


give


such claimants an


oDp)ortunit~v


secure


the benefits


which


gress


tended they should have under the prove


sions


of this


Act."


In view of the above considerations a duplicate notice was


mail


ed direct to the


claimant on October 9th


last, and he has duly filed with


me a


written


that I fix a reasonable fee to be paid to you in accordance therewith.


request
In these


circumstances


Cons


tlmt


have acquired


necessary


sdiction


fixing the attorney's


fee in this case.


time


within


which


you may


furnish


the information


requested


printed


notice


of October


1928


, is hereby


extended


to February


1929.


Should you fail


to furnish such information by that date, the only alter-


native open to me will
from the records of th


be to determine the character and value of your


case in the possession of th


services


Commission.


Thereafter,


stoner


in response


, the attorney filed


request


with him an affidavit


American


1iv'in


Commis-


the information


which he desired


to have considered


by the


American Commissioner


as showing


reasonableness of the


fee asked


*1inl


which


infor-


mation


was


brought


attention


claimant,


who


filed


affidavit


in reply, a


copy


which


was


transmitted


attorney,


who


not filed a reply.


--~~n I f


1


--




1; :;


r"1* s..


V


414


ment,


which


amount


represents


value of 1


longing to the claimant lost at the time of hi


was a member of the crew of


fireman.
ury Dec


the E


meralda


The total amount received by the clai


)artrnent, in


payment of this award


paid direct to him on May 23,
The attorney requests as co


$1,564.55,


'md


I- A


n addition


$85.00, accord in


1928.


mpensation


reimbursement of e


terms


referred to.


The claimant states in h


letter of O


services


ctober 8


Commissioner:


In June


ington,


for injuries


1923


engaged


to represent


received


McGowan


before he could b


1923.
I was


preparing


In his


made


by me


Lewis


me in my


while


McGowan


ci m


against


wa il


up an agreement


egin on mn


its terms,


also to pay


and pre


was


him all


y case.
to pay


This
him 3(


me and


agreement w
1% of the an


of the costs and other e


sending my claim.


affidavit filed


n this proceeding,


personal property .
capture. The claimant
S", in the capacity of
mant from the Treas-
; $5,215.53, which was


is services the sum of
expenses amounting to
agreement hereinafter


1928, to the American


Attorney at Law, Wash-
the German Government
oner of war.
1 directed that I sign it
as signed by me in June,.
mount he received for me.
enses incurred by him in


aimant further states:


gaged Mr


McGowan after he had twice communicated


with


me request-


I have him


take care of my case


for me,


he having been


unknown


me prior to


that time.


The


attorney


states


mb i


is affidavit


with


reference


employ-


ment


nthi


case and


initial presentation of thi


claim:


That


the claimant,


Charles


Bobar t,


was


advised


me on


Apri


1923,


( Exhibit
Germaznv


answer
on April


to his letter


. 1923


csflit


April
notice


1923


to file a claim


claim


against


to the Department


State
Scasep


(Exhibit
I' Exhibit


On April 9.


This wa


1923, claimnut tele


the final


raphed me to proceed with


to give notice under the


Agree-


.4


" ^^








415


support


McGowan h
copies of his


these


and


submitted


other


sixty-one


statements
exhibits,


affidavit


consistaln


mainly


correspondence in this case with the claimant and


the American Agency before tLhi


Commi


with


ssion.


examination


Mr.


McGowan


affidavit


and


exhibits


attached thereto shows that he ha


failed to file the claimant'


letter


him


dated


April 2,


1923


or any


previous


communication


from the claimant.
Exhibit No. 1 to hi


affidavit i


a copy of hi


letter to the claimant,


dated April 7

I acknowledgE


1923


in which it is stated


Receipt of your letter of April 2nd.


You are entitled to filin


on account


your


.being


a claim a


held


inst the


a prisoner


Imperial


on the S.


German Go
Esmeralde,


)vernment


can


recover a substantial


indemnity from the Imperial German Government.


If you wish me to proceed with th


me to proceed with the case as


Monday


case
Apri


please send me a telegram telling
9th, 1923, is the last day in which


the claim can be filed.
I will file your claim


without


charge


later we can get to-


gether on the matter of what I am to receive for my services providing


.aJ teAL


thing is


recovered, and


the event


no recovery


there wil


be no charge to


you for my services.


Mr.


McGowan


wrote


Department of


State


on the


same


da.y


have


been


requested


Charles C.


Bobart


an American


citizen


of Balti-


more,


Maryland,


to. file a


claim against


the Imperial


German


Government


account of his being h


eld prisoner in Germany.


Dama


ges are requested in the amount, of ten


thousand dollars.


The


claimant


had


authorized


filing


claim


that


time, but on April 9,


1923


, he t.elegrapl)hed NMr


McGowan to


"l) proceed


with the case "


, and on April 10,


1923.


Mr. McGowan replied


beg to


questing


advise


you, of


the receipt


of your


me to proceed with your claim and


telegram


in reply


of the 9th.


thereto


I am


instant
pleased


Fi:1








416

May I impress upon you the imperative necessity in attending to this matter


mnaediately
Washington,


as the commission


sooner


has n
send


IOW


begun


to adjudicate


me the information


cases


the quicker


itward will be made.
a have requested from the Imperial German Government an indemnity to the
amount of ten thousand dollars, and I am of the opinion that a very substantial
#art of this sum will be awarded to the claimant.

On May 20, 1923, the claimant replied:


I write


you a


lines


to let you know


that I


don't


understand


how


make


these


papers


was


good


healthy when


went


to Germany


I was ruptured after I was there about 8 or 9 months but I was not tended to


for that I


was in


the hospital


4 months,


2 weeks andI


While


was


there and I have not been the same since, I have had trouble with my stomach
ever since till I had to be operated on twice and can't do any heavy work, for I


am under the doctor's care yet I don't make any more than


living wages and


have a hard time to get along on.


I would write sooner but I was trying to get money enough to come over and
see you if you would file the papers outright and let me know what to do.


Mr. McGowan states in his affidavit that upon


receipt of this


letter he conferred with


claimant and advised


him as to the char-


acter of proof required and told him I
On June 9, 1923, the claimant again


would assist in procuring it"
wrote to Mr. McGowan:


A few lines to let you know that I am sorrow that I have keep you so long


but I have had


trouble in getting the doctor's.


They


have been out of town.


I have done the best I could in filling out the papers.


If you receive any money,


please let me know


what


bills


so that


they can not come back at me for just as soon as I get it I


will have to go to


the hospital again


to be operated on again.


I am having a


hard


time to get


along.


he contingent


fee agreement


involved in


this


case


was


enclosed




.:t.ii
II"
II*~ Ve


417


* would undoubtedly be justified in


fixing the amount specified


in the


contracts.


other cases,


however,


particularly


where


large contingent


are specified,


it is hoped that the fees ultimately


fixed will


bear a proper rela-


tion to the work performed and expenditures incurred.

The American Commissioner has held in previous


deci


sons


(Deci-


sions Nos.


8.25


,58,


61 and


in Sinu-


lar proceedings, in


terested
after hi
he falls


party,


that


one of


when


which


(No.


this


the claimant is entirelyK


s own interests in making a fee agreement
within the group first referred to.


attorney


was


competent


with hi


an in-
to look


attorney,


case


however


the claimant does


appear


have


been


" fully capable of protecting


agreement.


hown


"his
that


own interests in entering


was a


man


worldly


into this
wisdom


or of business


experience.


Fur t hermo re,,


letters to


attorney.


dated May 20 and June 9


1923


indicate that.


when


retained


this


attorney


was


a very


man


and


was


without


funds


to employ


an attorney, and that he did not understand how to execute the ques-


tionnaire and


the other papers sent to


given any thought to the


probably


hi m.


presentation


realize


that


had


He apparently


a claim
a claim


against


until


had not


(xern ma ny.


the attorney


communicated with him.


While th


attorney might be criticized for


disregarding


against


soliciting


ethical
claims.


rules


American


neverthel


was


Bar


IzSOnf


action


initiative


of this attorney that notice of thi


claim wa


given to the Department


State


prior to


the ex


piration


period


during-


which


claim


again


st Germany might


then


filed.


must


noted


however


that


under


later


agreement


between


two


Governments,


tendin
before
which


the time for filin


CoInmi


must


sslon


taken


claims


claim could have been brought


subsequently


into


consideration


I so-called
in valuing


" late


claim "


attorney
S.


I~ .r


ii -


=








418

The basis of this claim was not for damages on account of being


held a prisoner on


in his letter


claimant'


turned


health


the S.


claimant


through


as a prisoner


S. Esmeralde "


on account


lack


in Germany


, as stated


serious
medical


this


proper
Claims


by this attorney


impairment


care


while


character


were


dealt with by the Commission


in a


the only awards made to claimants


speciall
in that


group by themselves,


group


and


were the result of


direct


negotiations between


several others of this group,


two


Agents.


t


a compromise settlement


the German Agent without requiring


actually


which,


suffered


in most


claimant.


cases


Init


and


trict proof
Germany's
S.


group


his
was


as to


case


as in


offered by


the damages


liability


including


therefore,


one


claimant was unable to produce.


As pointed <
Administrative


American


and


Jurisdictional


Comn ll


Dec


ision


ssioner


September


general


1928


(page 10) :


action


fixed


under


of Congress


contract


in authorizing
or agreement


-attorneys or agents suggests an inquiry


the fixing
prev iouslvy


of fees


made


the circumstances


" whether


claimants
in which


or not


with
such


agreements were made.


* *


* the claimants,


informed


as to the


scope


probably
cha racter


attorneys


of the services


a iso,


were


ivell


to be rendered


their agreements were based upon
did not develop as anticipated, ar


expectations


which


assumed


conditions


perhaps contemplated


which


a greater


less amount,


or a


different character,


of work


or responsibility


for the attor-


neys than was actually required or performed.


services


actually


rendered


this


attorney,


appears


from his affidavit


which


outline


in detail


the character


'-Ind


extent


of his services, that he prepa red


the original statement


the claim,


which


was


thereafter


verified


filed


with


clainiant


American


on January
S


Agency


I.,.


, 1924


, and


presentation


was
this




* I.'


419


can Agency


and it appears that the proof


the American nation-


ality
himse


of the claimant
lIf, assisted by (


was


to some extent


mne George


Wagner,


, supplied


who


by 'the


claimant


was not employed


this attorney.
The sequence of


which
records
parties,


the events


pertinent


this


to be a


Commission


this case


present


and


reviewed


proceeding


information


chronologically,


hown
filed


follows:


The attorney states in his affidavit:


Under


date


of October


1923


American


Agen


requested


additional


proof


of the claim


Exhibit


Called


at office


American


Agent


about


character of additional


proof


required.


On November 6, 1923, I requested claimant to


ve me


more information about


his maltreatment


German


prison


camps,


(Exhibit


I had


proceeded


inquire from some of h


fellow prisoners of war about the camps where claim-


ant had been


interred


On January 12,


1924,


sic] and to ascertain facts
informed American Agent


about his


that I


injuries.


would go to Baltimore,


(Exhibit 19)


to put in proper shape quickly.


On same date I requested claimant


to communicate with me


immediately


y, (E


shibit 20).


* *l *


The


exhibits


attached


affidavit,


however


show


that


October


, 1923, the


American Agent informed the attorney


*


your client


an examination


to file


of the


au additional


papers


statement


shows that


setting


it will


forth


with


be necessary for
greater particu-


larity the facts


in reference to the treatment he received


while


the German


camp


which


he alleges


caused


the injuries


he received,


so, if possib


giving the name of the camp where he was interned.


November


1923


, the


attorney


forwarded


letter


claimant and


January 9


reque


1924


hirrIl


the American


supply the desired


Agent informed


information.


the attorney that the


claim would be dismissed unless


the evidence requested on October 26,


1923


was


forthcoming


and


on January


12, 1924, the


attorney


for-




anyr K:


.. ?
. :*.


420

The claimant states in his affidavit


wa S


always


my understanding that Mr.


McGowan


was


representing sev-


men who were taken off of the


same ship and that the services performed


were


not oul


for me but


for all


others


w homr


he represented


matter of tl


eir claims.


The


records


Commission


show


that


claimant


was


cor-


rectly
torney
claims


informed


represented


on this


point.


the claimants


It appears


from


in all


them


other


in which awards were made except two,


that


"Es


Docket Nos.


meraldas "


14 and


On August


1924


, the American Agent wrote to the attorney that


as a result


an informal


conference


with


German


Agent


latter had agreed not to oppose an award in


the sum


of $3,500,


with


interest
attorney


thereon


from


communicated


November


this


August 26,


offer


claimant.


The


1924


claimant'


reply, dated September


1924


is not submitted as an exhibit to the


attorney
t


October 20


affidavit,


19 4,


in answer


attorney
thereto,


letter


recollmmends


ie claimant,
a rejection


dated


offer


a n d


request


" discretionary power "


to act


claimant.


Noveiilher


1924


the claimant


wrote


the attorney:


* I


leave


it to


do the best


can


with


the Mixed


Claims Commission,


but I


hope


man Agent offer the only thing I


that


it will not


be any


small


than


see is for you to do the best you can.


the Ger-
* *


November


1924


at torney


wrote


American


Agent


that the offer in compromise


was not acceptable to the claimant and


that


additional


documentary


evidence


would


furnished.


The attorney states that on


the American Agency


by me after


doctoro


a conversation


November :.
"s affidavits


with


1924


which


doctor.


had C


" No


transmitted to


been


further


prepared
evidence


was obtained or filed.







421


the American Agency to the claimant,


with the statement that any


information


you


might


give


bearing


upon


names


and


addresses of any of your associates who


witnessed


maltreatment


will


appreciated and


helpful."


same


date


requested the American Agency to secure from the German


attorney
Govern-


ment a copy


of the record


of the claimant'


treatment


in the Camp


Hospital at Luebeck.


* On August


1925


the attorney informed


the American Agency


that in the other "Esmeraldas cases


in which he represented claim-


ants, settlements similar


that


proposed in


Bobart case


would


meet his approval.


The American Agent obtained from


the German


Agent offers of settlement in


mera ldas


cases.


Sep-


tember 25


1925


American Agency


transmitted


attorney


these


offers


settlement,


a nd


informed


him


that


any


accept-


ances will not be a


reeable to the German Agent if one of the offers


is rejected."


The records of the Comm


on show that on


October


1, 1925


attorney


accepted


German


Agent'


offer


as well


as in


four


other


"Esmeralda


submitted to thi


Comm


a result of which an award


cases


and


on upon an ag


was rendered


thereafter,


this


claim


was


reed statement of facts, as
on behalf of the claimant


on October 30, 1925,


as already


tated.


The attorney'


statement in his


affidavit that


"these other [civilian


prisoners


pared


accurate


war]


$3,5C
since


10


cases


with


were


interest


, as the attorney


settled
offered


for
Mr.


is aware


$600


with


Bobart,"


awards


were


interest
is not s


made,


com-
trictly
based


upon the offers of the German Agent in the Durfee case


for $2,500,


in the


Byrd


Williams


case


case


$1,850,


for $1,000,


in the


and


Rogers
Smith


case


case


$990,


for $950,


in the


as com-


pared to $3,500 in the instant case.


mtL_


-L A-, -, ---


~1


* ____ ---


1r -


* n~~ *U~t~r*T~t~~TLY 'S 'u-*1 3 flrmlr r r *u *u r u nfl g*n 3~ r5 rur *I Cn fr in rn u nr fu v


L1., L


,LL,.,


n n n i-rn r~n n n r L1




-.. .-. .-. -- -r -' S -. ST J- 'll'--1


422


tionable.


He knew the work


had performed


for him.


It was then fresh in


his mind, and not one word was


uttered by


reflecting upon


my handling


of his case or the amount of compensation I was to receive.
It is unnecessary to review in detail the subsequent correspondence


between


attorney


legislation


and


pending


claimant,


Congress


which


with


relates


respect


generally
payment


awards.


The correspondence con


sists of eight letters from the attor-


ney and two


letters from the claimant


the claimant


's letter of Octo-


ber 8, 1926, not having been


submitted by the attorney.


On April


7. 1928


, subsequent to the enactment of the "Settlement


of War


Claims


Act of


1928"


attorney


wrote


claimant


instructing


obtaining


him


payment


requirement


award.


passing,


complied
is proper


with


note


that


this


letter


made


no mention


American


Commissioner's


notice of April 2,


which had


addressed(


been received


to the claimant
the attorney on


in care of the attorney,


April


The claimant


did not return the form


and
tion


on April


blank.


of application


the attorney
S.


The


claimant


sent


, however


to the attorney, as requested,
he claimant, another applica-


mailed


application


direct


Trea


from


sury
Sd


Trea


Depart ment


sury
L/


andl


Department


on May
a,


a check


, 1928


received


in payment


, direct
award.


Thereafter,


cate


with


claimant apparently


the attorney to


made


arrange


no attempt
payment of


to common uni-


appears from the American Commissioner',


letter dated January


1929, first above quoted, the
for the claimant to pay him.


attorney


likewise


"waited


until July


It is unnecessary to consider in


detail the negotiations which sub-


sequently took place between the attorney and claimant


(each repre-


sented by counsel)


in this case.


for an amicable adjustment


Counsel for the claimant states that


of the attorney


he offered $750 in


a. *u- I I. a Lu C


n ,,


n I ..




'r'~ !Y*'~~


423


benefits arising therefrom.


view


of the size of the award


which


was rendered


this case


the claimant


no reason


complain


about the outcome of his case.


The services


which


a


award by this Commission


attorney alleges were rei
was made, in attempting


ndered


after


bring about


legislation for the payment of the award and in the negotiations for


payment of hi


cannot


charged against


claimant


fixing the


because


such


services


were


performed


as much in


interest of the attorney as of the claimant.


The record in this


case shows that it comes within the application


of the statement of the American


Commissioner in


tive and Jurisdictional Decision of September


, 1928,


Adnui n istra-


as follow


* the Government of the United States has taken the full


responsibility


and control in the presentation of all


claims before this Commission.


Attorney


for claimants have


not been


permitted


to appear before


the Commission


they have been allowed


to file briefs only with


the approval and


endorsement


of the


American


Agent.


Government


Treaty of Peace with Germany the right of


not only
recovery,


established


where


such


right exists,


but it has also established a


governmental organization for the presentation of


these claims
organization


thus


has borne
established


all the ex
has taken


penses


of such


full control


organization,


over


the presentation


claims and performed the major part of the work involved in their prosecution,


and in m:
duction of
claimants'
also to as!

In un


37331


cases


f evidence, ai
attorneys as


has done everything


not infrequent li


connected therewith,
rit has been obliged


except


to instruct


to what evidence was needed to establish the claim


sist them in procuring it.


dertaking


decide


isputed


question


valuation


well as in ascertainin


dered,


the American


contentions either of


assisted in


reaching


the character and extent of the services


Commissioner h
the claimant or


his conclu


not
the


MUJIS


relied


wholly


attorney,!
records of


upon
has


ren-
the
been


case


file with the Commission


and he has concluded, after an examination







424


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


3 1262 08484 1880


S- -
:.i eral Administrative and Jurisdictional Decision of September 28:
kbl& jjI v f I j..11 rt< f wf 4>*f jj


1028 and ater careu examnaton an u cons eraton


II blle.


;:k4':
'i"~
,rr;

":
:,:
:
:,:
,:,,:
i :,::
; "ii
.:i.
i, i
,
12:-5:
:
x:
E,

,r,
::


furnished,


and


this


records


proceeding


Commission


attorney.
pertin


questions involved, and after due, deliberation thereon,
The Amierican Commissioner decides and fixes as t


formation
claimant


paid


by the claimant; Charles


he


Bobart,


y and thie ^
ent to the fi

... .
reasonable


attorney;


Lewis Arthur McGowan, in this case; the sum of Seven Hundred and


Fifty


Dollars


($750.00), in addition to the disbursement


expended:


by the attorney amounting to Eighty-Five Dollars


($85.00), the said


fee to be paid by the claimant and received


by the


attorney


as full


compensation


services rendered :in


prosecution


and


col-


election of this claim, as defined by Section


9 of the Settlement of


War Claims Act of 1928 "


Done at


Washington, I).


C., this 28th
CHAnDLER


day of June, 1930.
. ANDERSON,


American Commissioner,


Mixed


Claims


Commission,


States


and


Germanzy.


~T4'


.9:4


United


: E"
~rJI