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

F7 9l P7 I


'it
IL:
I'::














St.
?r'I


-.I *,


COMMISSIONER


MIXED CLAIMS COMMISSION

UNITED STATES AND GERMANY



DECISION NO. 71

IN THE MATTER OF


REASONABLE


FEES


FOR


ATTORNEYS


OR


AGENTS UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF SECTION 9 OF
THE SETTLEMENT OF WAR CLAIMS ACT OF 1928"



DOCKET NO. 12860


iMeta Berg, Claimant

George A. .Nugent, Charles T. Haas, and Prew Savoy, Attorneys



CHANDLER P. ANDERSON


American


Comrzm-tpsionzeri


THE AMERICAN


FIXING




~~4iI3


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


American Commissioner
(II)












THE


AMERICAN


MIXED


CLAIMS


COMMISSIONER

COMMISSION


UNITED


STATES


AND


GERMANY


DECISION NO. 7
IN THE MATTER OF


FIXING


REASONABLE


FEES


FOR


ATTORNEYS


OR


AGENTS UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF SECTION 9 OF


THE


"SETTLEMENT OF WAR


CLAIMS


ACT


1928"


DOCKET NO. 12860


Meta Berg, Claimant


George A. Nugent, Charles T


Haas, and(1


Pree


Savoy, Attorneys


The


above-named


claimant


duly


filed


with


American


Commissioner a


written request that he fix a reasonable fee to be


paid by her to her attorneys, George A. Nugent and Prew Savoy,


of Washington,


D. C., and Charles


T. Haas, of Portland,


Oregon,


as compensation for whatever services have been rendered by them
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."
The claimant has objected to the amount of the fees asked by the


U m .




I:


464

IT this case an award was rendered by this Commission on arch


29, 1930, on behalf of the claimant, for $18,000,


with interest thereon


rate


of five


cent


annum


from


January


1919


the date of payment,


which amount represents a compromise agree-


meat between the American and


German Agents as to


a debt


con-


sitting of a bank balance, owing to the claimant


from


the Commerz


ind Privat Bank, Hannover,


senting


interest


on a trust


her husband, Max Berg II,


Germany, as of


fund


and


who died in


other


April
items


Germany in


, 1917,


repre-


inherited from
October, 1913,


and


who


had


previously


inherited


from


Estate


father


Max Berg I,


who died in Germany in July, 1913.


A claim had also


been


presented


depreciation


value


securities


in the


trust fund on behalf of Rudolf Berg, Ella Nixon


Reeves, Max Berg,


and Minnie


Schlottman, sons


Otto
and


Berg, Louise
daughters of


the claimant.


These claimants later decided not to


prosecute


their


claim because of its doubtful legal aspects and also because a lump-


sum


settlement


remainder


claim


on behalf


their


mother, the claimant herein, had been effected


conditioned


upon the


withdrawal


of the claim for securities depreciation.


The


claimant


received


payment


award


from


Treasury


Department


because


Mr.


Nugent


brought


suit


Supreme


Court


District


Columbia


against


claimant


and the Secretary


of the


Treasury to enjoin


payment of the award


unless


twenty-five


cent


thereof


was


paid


him.


. Haas


claims a fee of ten


$343.25
Savoy


cover


claims


per cent of the total


cash


disbursements


as a fee


cent


amount of the


incurred


of the


total


him


award
while


award


for disbursements, estimated at $85.00, being included in hi
for services.


and
Mr.


charge
charge


If Mr. Nugent was the only


attorney claiming a fee


the American Commissioner would leave the fixing of hi


this case,
fee to the


court
render


above-mentioned


unnecessary


suit


exercise


decision (
American


which


would


Commissioner's


jurisdiction


under


" Settlement


War


Claims


Act


1928."


Inasmuch, however, as the fixing of the


-- a


fees of the other attorneys


-~~~~~ C. F I J u IJ1 u


r., ~


I r













BiI

'I.:..


Supreme


Court


District


Columbia


shall


discontinued


upon the rendering of this decision.


It '
from
claim
Berg,


appears


from


records


as against


because


deposits and Ga
value of Marks
on February 3,


tion


Mr.


the information filed


of
the
the


this


Commission


Governn
depreci:


erman security
200,000.00 w
1926, by the


Nugent,


alleges,


tions and correspondence with Mr


New


Yorh


employed


Mr.


Ott


attorney


SCity, 1
since 19
o Berg,


from


formerly


15 as attorney


claimant
mother


d a-3+(A


aent


by the


that


parties


notice


Germany


on


hereto


"of a
behalf


ation in the value of pre-v
holdings in the approximate
is filed with the Denartment


attorney George


was


based


Joseph V
Portland,


for the Ba
, acting u
I January


upon


i


Nu
pre


Voerndle
Oregon,


nderg
nder


and


possible


var


Otto
bank


nominal
of State


igent. This ac-
Svious conversa-
, an attorney of


who


had


been


Estate.


a general


1915


had


power of
:or many


years aided her in managing


1926


Mr.


execution


this
who


Woerndle se
, authorizing


Commission,


were


and


interested


wants one-third
On February


him


collection


that
L of


eral month


inquiring


been


1\


it to
Mr.


her business


hnim
Nuge


requesting


in the


but it is well


11
Ir.


Otto


their claim.


Mr.


about


Nugent,


matter


Mr.
Berg


claim


af


a skeleton
nt to repr
that he f
i. He adc


l'airs.
power


-esent


led


in t
tha


On February
of attorney
Mr. Berg bel
lhe names of
t "this attor


worth it if he can deliver the


fore


nev


bacon."


Woerndle wrote to Mr. Nugent inform-


"has


Having
on July 1


and Mr


previously informed by


asked
heard


, 1926


us to


assist


nothing
, wrote t<


. Woerndle


Berg that his


them


further
o Mr.


in the


sev-


Toerndle


replied that he had
sisters and brothers


did not seem to be able to agree on anything he proposed, and hence


preferred


" to leave hi


Nugent wrote Mr.


open


in this


matter


hands off."


Woerndle that


you


believe


Again on November


I shall
there


be glad to


is any


keep


purpose


1927, Mr.
my files
in doing


so but if not, please advise me and I will di
Woerndle replied that he would forward Mr


Berg and


that he had


written to


Berg


smiss the matter."


Nugent'


several time


been unable to get any further than our files indicate.


letter to


Mr.
Mr.


s but have
Five months


465


it;f.


--w-- ......


rr


9


nr


r


]





Si

4<:


466


~dpi~~S


1928,


route to


Europe.


Otto


Berg


had


a conference


Woerndle,
Berg wro


with the


result that,


his mother,


u nder


enclosing


date of


June


1


a power of attorney


928,
in


Otto
favor


of Mr.


Woerndle,


which he asked her to execute and return


Mr.


Woerndle.


Mr.


Woerndle


transmitted


this


power


and


letter


of Otto


Berg to


Mrs. Meta Berg on June


19, 1928.


The claimant,


on June 27,


1928, executed


this power of attorney in favor of Mr.


Woernidle who, on July 3, 1928, executed a substitutional


attorney in favor of Mr. Nugent.


power of


Mr. Berg alleges, in an affidavit


filed


in this


proceeding,


that


assurance


was


given


him


Mr.


Woerndle at the above-mentioned


conference that the


fee would


approximately $1,000, but in no event over $1,500.


In the meantime,


namely, on June 30, 1928, Mr. Nugent again wrote the State Depart-


ment


advising that


"this situation


is considerably


confused


and


may develop that Meta Berg is a
relatives."


joint claimant with possible other


Thereafter, Mr. Nugent


alleges,


" through


medium


corre-


spondence and personal conferences in New


York, over a


period of


months," he had


"indicated to


Mr.


Woerndle the nature and extent


of the evidence d
" was assembled,"


esired in support of the claim,"


and


that


he addressed a


letter to


which, he states,


Mr.


Woerndle,


under date of August 29, 1928, in which he stated in effect that sum-


cient evidence


was in hand


on which


proceed


and that the only


additional evidence desired at that time was appropriate evidence of


American


citizenship.


He added


"It was not


the custom


of your


affiant to file evidence in support of claims piecemeal, but rather to
assemble all available evidence and file it with the Memorial, or the


questionnaire


forms,


when


was


believed


that


evidence


was


complete or as nearly complete as was possible."


On January


11, 1929, the American Agency


before this Commis-


sion


wrote


Mr.


Nugent


concermng


this


claim,


enclosing


four


copies each


tively


Bank


Questionnaire


Account


Forms


Claims


and


Nos. 1
Bond


and


Claii


7 relating
ms. The


respec-
Agency


requested that three copies of these forms
with accompanying exhibits within thirty


be filled in and
days of the rece


returned
ipt of its


w


e


m




nfl-*---


467


date


February


1929.


answer


questions


on these


forms as to who was the attorney author


ed to appear on behalf of


the claimant and the


fee agreed upon, Mr. Nugent inserted hi


own


name with hi


fee agreed upon


dress
was


and included a statement to the effect that hi


one-third


of the amount recovered "


and that


there was no agreement in writing to this effect.


Upon
March


receipt


1, 1929,


these


wired Mr


question nai re


. Woerndle


form


in New


Mr.


Otto


York City


Ber


as follows


We will not pay over fifteen per cent on the coil


If not satisfactory can


make other arrangements.


section of money of our estate.
Answer.


Thi
Mr. (


telegram
;o Berg,


brou
Mr.


about


Woerndle


an exchange


and


Nugent,


telegram


which


between


how


first


an offer by Mr. Nugent to handle the bank account claim on a twenty


per cent basis a
counter offer by


Nugent.
formed


In
Mr.


nd the bond claim on a fifteen


Mr. Berg of ten


course


xWoerndle


of
that


this
he


per cent,


which


telegraphic e


had


made


per cent


basis


then a


was refused by


change,


other


Berg in-


arrangements,


would give the latter preference


if he would handle the claims on a


[ per
the


cent
i effect


basis.


that


Mr.


his brought
Berg should


an answer


from


communicate


Mr.


directly


Woerndle
with Mr.


Nugent at


Washin


ton.


Thereafter, Mr


. Woerndle received


a letter,


dated March


, 1929,


from Mr


Haas


as follows:


am writing


to-day


in connection


with


a matter


which


s extremely


emba rra,
concerns


me by


Otto Berg and his


reason


your


previous


claim before the Mix


connection


therewith.


This


ed Claim Commission at Wa


ington.


taken


Yesterday


away


Otto came in


matter


" all hopped


from


" and
Nugent


informed


me that
turned


same over to a


Mr. Robert R.


Rankin.


He advis


me that


Mr. Rankin


was


handling the matter on a 10


basis


and that you and Mr


Nugeut had demanded


considerably


more.


He showed


me several


telegrams


which


been


changed


taken


between you


this action


him.


informed


endeavored


was


to persuade


too bad


to rescind


action


with you,


but he was


absolutely


y thru,"


as he e


pressed it, and he th


en stated


that had it not been for our close


association he


would have


offered it to me,


but he knew


that


would


not accept


it by


reason


of the


was


that ri


were attending


g to.


therefore


offered


w Y --. ~ S~ -H *L -, evat Lss


d it to


v


at


)tt


hlla~ np~~


UUII LUML


Y


I. J.. L4 .




...... ........ ..* .... .
A


468


received from the department in Washington informed
be filed by March 24th, and that a previous notice f
12th. This, he seems to think, indicated a purpose
a signature of contract for one-third or thereabouts.
has consulted with various attorneys as to the amou
services, and he himself feels well satisfied that 10% i
amount.
Will you kindly advise me by night letter what you
is, and if you desire that I should endeavor to proceed


hii
Froi
of
It
nt
s a


m that a claim must
n you stated March
hurrying him into
is apparent that he
to be paid for such
just and reasonable


r opinion in
ed therewith


the ma tte; .
upon some


arrangement as above outlined.


I will be glad to do so.


Mr. Woerndle's night letter to Mr. Haas in reply to
was dated March 12, 1929, and reads as follows:
Extremely regret unexpected difficulty Berg matter but Nugents


above


terms were


written
attorney
filing of
can do fi
situation
claim wo
at all. I
may be


Otto already February, nineteen twenty-six,
was given Nugent. All work has already been
blanks sent Otto, hence doubt if he can disp
:om Portland is mailing the papers. Otto does
. No award is yet made, perhaps may never
uld be out in cold as far as time for filing is
Do not think case can successfully be handled
lost. Awards so far few. Nugent high-type n


and I
done b
lace h
not se
be.
concern
from
aan bi


'efo
Iy N
im.
emn
But
ned
d;st


re power of
Tugent except
All anyone
to appreciate
t for Nugent
or for filing
ance, but all


it resentful


varication.


Letter follows.


It does no
was written
therein that
Meanwhile(
Berg formal
and stating:


t appear from the (
after this night lett,
" Letter follows."
e, on March 9, 1929
ly advising him of


documents submitted that any letter
er, in accordance with the statement


, Mr. Nugent wrote directly
the former's position in the


Mr.


matter,


While we should be happy
straight contingent interest of
disposition to be browbeaten
pursued, and in the event that
forward through the medium
every effort within our power
efforts which we have exerted
approval of Mr. Woerndle.


to carry your claim forward


on the basis


e twenty-five per cent, we have not
by any such ill-mannered tactics
, upon reconsideration, this matter i
of this office, we shall at a late
to insure that we are amply con pen
I in your behalf, by and with the a


ie sli
Syou
not c
date
.ted f


ghtest
have
carried
make
or the


authority and


Mr. Berg replied by telegram under date of March 14,


1929:


T.4ntP r i infl or~olim< rol Prooodiny fharnhlfh nt^hor nttniarnarcif Paniioaa- iunh




ft.


469


The amount suggested by
services to date was not paid,


Mr.


Nugent


above


telegram


nor any part of it.


During the course of the above exchange of


communications, Mr.


Berg, according to the affidavit of Mr. Haas, consulted and retained


him


American


of the


handle


Agency


claim,


case.


requesting
proofs still


March


information


required,


1929


Berg


as to


and


what


wired


present


time


limits


Status
still


remained for filing further claims and


proofs.


The Agency replied


that


"No


extended


proof at a
a March 25


filed
1929.


in you r;
Letter


and


mother'


following


Th,


claims.
e letter


Time
which


followed, dated


informed
tension o


Mr.


March


Berg


f time can


that


, 1929, e:
" under


given, and


qplaifled


the status of the case and


circumstance


you are


advised


no further


that if the ques-


tionnaires in


case together with supporting


evidence are not in


the Age
the Con
would p
enclosed
Account.


two


form


rncy on
mission
probably


the
as i
be di


two sets of


date


stated,
present


missed


Bond


Questionnaire, copy of
letters in bond claims.


your c
stands.
lack of (


ase
In


will
I thi


submitted


event


evidence.


Questionnaire,


Rules


The


case


letter also


two sets of the Bank


Commi


sslon


and


In acknowledging


the receipt of the above letter from the Agency,


Mr. Berg by night letter dated March 13,


that
that


of Mr


* could i
e proofs
Nugent.


.orwarc
were


claims


lacking


He added


beca use


that he


had


1929


, informed the Agency


mother


they


were


cabled


immediately


in the


possession


to Germany for new


bank and bond statements and asked if he could


file the claim


prior


to March


Haas likewise
an extension


25t.h and have an exten


wrote the Agency


time


within


sion of time to file the proofs.


on March


which


Mr.


, 1929, also asking for


proofs.


After


con-


siderable detailed correspondence between the Agency and Mr. Haas


the time for


filing proofs


In carrying out her desi


was extended to
re to dismiss Mr.


May


1929.


nt and Mr.


Woern-


from


any


further


connection


with


case


claimant


March 11


, 1929, executed


a revocation of her


"power of


attorney in


writing, executed at Portland,


Oregon,


in the month of June


1928


r r -


r r lu .,,




-7rur *


470

on March 30, 1929, the claimant executed in favor of her son,;tt v -


Berg,


a power


attorney


authorizing


him


in this


matter because he "is fully familiar with the circumstances and facts


of my said claims; that I am required to travel and


be absent from


home


readily
claims."


in Beaverton,


confer with
The other


sons


Oregon,
attorney,


and


health


Charles


daughters


and


Haas


of the


unable


about


claimant


said


on March


28, March


30, April


12, April


and April


1929,


respectively,


executed in favor of their


brother,


Otto


Berg,


a power


attorney


authorizing him to act on their behalf in presenting their claim before


this


Commission,


and,


on March


q23


, and


respectively, they executed powers of attorney authorizing Mr


1929,
Haas


to act as their attorney in the presentation and
claim.


prosecution


of their


As to his fee for services, Mr. Haas states that
to all of the claimants at the time the claims and


cuted, that my fee would be ten


it was explained


powers


per cent of the award


were


exe-


obtained.


was not deemed necessary to obtain a special contract


in writing to


this effect inasmuch


as the compensation


basi


on which


was


trained was set forth under Question 29 of the cla im or quest ionnaire."


Thereafter, according to Mr. Haas,


"it developed


from


the exten-


sive


correspondence


between


United


States


Agency


and


this


office


from


March


July,


1929,


that


there


were


very


formidable


problems facing us
dence necessary to


obtaining


and gathering the


properly present the


facts upon


proofs
which


and
the


evi-
Berg


claims were based, knowing just what proofs and evidence were essen-


trial, etc.
involved


Mr.


Otto


and


in the


as there


case,


were
Swas,


Berg, acting for


also


after


highly


important


extensive


the claimants, and


legal


conferences


after


questions


had


careful


with
con-


sideration of the situation, decided to engage the services of a lawyer
in Washington familiar with and experienced in the procedure before


Commission."


Accordingly, Mr. Prew


Savoy


was


retained


and


on August 5,


1929, Mr.


Otto


Berg, acting for


himself and


virtue


above-mentioned


mother,


powers


attorney


brothers, and sisters, authorized Mr.


given
Savoy


him


on their







471


Were placed before me without even reading them, much less under-


standing their import and meaning."


She disclaims any knowledge


0of having authorized any attorney to act for her in the presentation


and


': Haas


prosecution


whom


claim


admits


before


herself


Commission


agreed


Sb exceeding ten per cent of the amount recovered.
i .': "~ ,, ,, ,JL.L


to pay
She say


except Mr.
a fee not
's: "I wish


to state that I acknowledge Mr. Haas claim,


in which he asks ten per


cent of my money


as his commission.


I also


acknowledge


for


rem<


miscellaneous
ember making


expenses,
a verbal


which


is a grand


agreement


with


total


him


of $343.25.
this matter


which I agreed to pay him not to


exceed ten per cent of th


money


recovered


when


paid


, plus


such as he has listed as Exhibit H.


any
Thi


necessary


items


expense,


I am free to acknowledge


and am willing to pay on this basis if approved by the Commissioner.


Beyond


this,"


says,


state


on my


solemn


oath


that


I have


never agreed to pay any


one else for services in this case and at all


times


I have


understood


and


have


repeatedly


been


told


that


this


was to be the entire cost of


collecting the money


for me.


She re-


quests,


however, that


" if the Commissioner does finally


decide


that


others are entitled to compensation,


I ask that such compensation be


divided from the ten per cent I have agreed to pay to Mr. Charle
Haas."


considering


extent


services


rendered


these


torneys, it must be noted


that the American


Comm


loner can not


take into consideration the work performed by any of them in con-
nection with the claim of the sons and daughters of the claimant for


depreciation


of the


value of securities


in the trust fund


since com-


pensation


tingent upon


services


rendered


obtaining an award


in connection


and no award


therewith


was


was made on


con-
that


item


of the claim.


appears


from


information


the services rendered by him and Mr.


together
Nugent's


because


the latter


fee, consisted


corn pen


submitted
Woerndle


ation


filing the claim


Nugent


that


which must be taken


is to be
on ginall3


included


with


Mr.


State


Department, preparing the powers of attorney to Mr


. Woerndle and






i~*<~ 4VEh 4


472


Joseph Woerndle." It also appears from the American Aency 's files
that it wrote to Mr. Nugent on June 27, 1929, stating that iyou are


that the record in this case, as developed by


to the date of the revocation of your power, apparently


one or two


nationality


documents


respectively, February 2, 1926,


must


Mr.


Nugent


noted, however,


were


afterwards


and


two


letters from


and June 30, 1928."


that
filed


questionnaires


Mr.


Haas


fill


without


your office


consists o
you dated,

led out by


material


change except


Mr.


Nugent's


as to


service


filed


name and


in notifying the


Mr.


aonnv


ThIf Aopnov will.


Mr.


Ha


1 of the attorney.
Department of thu


claim was of special value because it was through his prompt action
that the claim was filed within the time limit fixed by the agreement


between


jurisdiction


United


and


Germany


claims.


giving


If there


Commission


had


been


delay of even a day or two in filing the claim at that time, it would


have been outlawed so


far as this Commission is concerned.


After the performance of the above-mentioned services, Mr. Nugent
ceased to act as attorney for the claimant.


After
torney,


Mr
the


spondence


Nugent


*


Mr.


length


Haas a,
hy and
which


s claimant's


detailed


was


corre-
given


specific directions from time to time as to the nature of the evidence


desired. A
substantial
German sc


sembled" but


with those directions


documentary


evidence


the e
, and


translations of some of these documents which


language.
It had become
tion of this claim
and the America


May 23,


The case itself is a rather substantial


and compendious. It, apparent
Germany, thus necessitating an
the nart of eopnrinl and this A


inl


ly,


one, and


be sharply


from


evidence


procured a


American
allegedly


furnished


were in


and
"as-


English


the German


Successful prosecu-
experienced counsel
1as, in its letter of


.II


mranrsl onnflt~ru t


compensation


advised


%Ch


:"<

E~Th
j~






iit


State


States


over the so-called


" late "


was


succeeded


latter entered into


with


American


i rather
Agency


Lecting in accordance


amount


urces


Duplicating


some


Nugent


apparent at this time


would require the services of


that th


Agency


1929, that--


informed


the record rather cumbrous
contested by the Agency of


unusually careful and vigorous prosecution on


^ "^: :i'E:^::""i^
: ""ri,:*'"


"":rp:,


;
,E :: : r







473


August 1, 1929, of certain difficulties in establishing the claim,


were


apparent


from


record.


Thereafter


employed


S


which
i com-


petent
already
in all,


translator


accompanied


and


filed


them


translate


English


with


Gern


translations,


American


an documents
about twenty-


Agency


then


eight
pre-


pared and filed with the American Agent a memorandum regarding


this


claim


Agency's


use


in its


prosecution,


analyzing


exhibits :
conferred
January !
American


mnd


setting


personally


, 1930,


and


memorandum


forth
with'


a lengthy


German


were


possible


bases


the Ameri
conference


Agencies
discussed.


can


settlement.


Agency


was


jointly,


ielcl


and,
him


which


a result


He
also
with


then
, on
the


contents


this


conference


German Agent on
many admitting liabil
with interest on varic


*K ^ K v


, 1930,


an


reviewing the Gernna
li ereiri the Germal
entire claim on a lump s
of any disputed items.
cent per annum from Ja
subject to the approval
reality negotiated at th
this morning, it is asw
would recommend most s
V: This offer of the G
Sacceipted by Mr. Savo
against the German b
; the American Agen
Amrercan and Germa
was the basis for the
SIt thius appears thr
tabhe importance a
'$ outcome. It was due
able to agree on a c
Awarded, which was
**diy- negote at *t
assl]f--! WliCUWt


January 31
ty in the tV
is principal


I
IlL


, 19
total


30


filed


sum


sums


American Agency


Agent'


Agent


attitude t
manifested


from
in ar
owarc


the Answer of
$14,686.43, tog
varying dates.
letter to Mr.


1 this


willingness


claim,


st


Ger-
'ether


Savoy
aated:


to settle the


um basis, said sum to be in the nature of a compromise
The amount of $18,000 to draw interest at five per
nuary 1, 1919, has been arrived at by the two Agencies


of claimants and yourself.


e conference of the 28th,


Aimed


that


it is satisfactory


As this settlement


V


although not confirmed


you.


ras in
until


rate,


Strongly that the entire claim be settled on that basis.
erman Agent was approved by the claimant and
y, and the necessary waiver of any further claim
ank was executed by the claimant and filed with


cy


agreed


statement


was


n Agents on February 4, 1930,
award of the Commission.


at the services rendered


md


contributed


largely to
compromise


1~


substantially


tr.
to


signed


which statement


Savoy were of
the successful


his efforts that the two agents were


basi


satisfactory to


s of
the


settlement
claimant.


amount


a .. -


I: ,":


-~




-S.- -~n~n


474


servi

ices


rendered


rendered


on a contingent


on a quantum


present


case,


basis
Ivie i


merit basic
American


La."


thai
In


n for the
applying
** j


Comunaissioner


same
Sm


these nt


lnds


services rendered by these attorneys were of a character which
a somewhat higher rate than those fixed in his Administrative
sion No. II.


It remains,


therefore,


to determine


amount


of the


fees to


4*.. J:*
be1:-'.<'


paid by the claimant to each of these attorneys for their services on
the basis of the value of their respective services during the periods
when they in turn represented the claimant before this Commission
Taking up first the question of Mr. Nugent's fee, it is to be noted


that no


fee agreement, either written or oral,


was made


with hi


In.


The suggestion originally made by him in 1926 for a one-third con-


tingent fee was not accepted by the claimant.


Later Mr.


Woernd


le,


the immediate principal of Mr. Nugent, had represented to the claim-


ant in


1928,


before


the execution


of the


power


attorney to


hi


n,


N 1


that his charges would not exceed $1,000 to $1,500, and Mr. Nugent's
subsequent proposal, in filling in the answer as to his compensation
in the questionnaire, that his fee should be one-third of the amount


recovered,


was


promptly


rejected


claimant.


Mr.


N;ug;ent~s


services then


terminated and


thereafter no fee agreement was made


with
basis


him,


and


now


services


claims


compensation


rendered


on a quantum meruit


time


withdrawal


from the case.


Considering the special


value


of Mr.


Nugent'


services in


bring-


ing this claim within the jurisdiction of this Commission, as already


noted, and in aiding in its presentation


while acting in cooperation


with Mr.


Woerndle


the American Commissioner finds that a reason-


able
Mr.


his services, including therein


Woerndle


is five


the services


rendered


per cent of the amount to be received


by the


claimant in payment of the award.
As to the fees of Mr. Haas and Mr. Savoy, the record shows that
they each acted under a written agreement, either made or sanctioned


by the claimant,
for collecting th


ceived


under


fixing for each a contingent


claim,
award.


cent


The


agreement


n-


fee, for their service


amount


with


Mr.


Haas


! 1


_-


fr<


K>:~.i
; :i
41
VE
1; i
>11~




;A




.. I I**
I
.*
475


under


authority


powers


attorney


given


him


mother and all


brothers


and sisters


as hereinabove stated.


It appears from the record that Mr


Otto Berg i


a man of mature


judgment and


broad


business experience, and


that


in the


course


his business career he has been


vice-president of a general insurance


corporation,


Portland
that he i
siderable


and


secretary


, Oregon.


IS S


and


tated


s a shrewd and able


financial


success.


treasurer


mai


and
i of


a utilities


uncontradicted


affairs, and


mother


confidence


company


n the record,
achieved con-


in his


judg-


ment is shown by


her reliance


upon


advice in


dealing


with her


affairs.


As held by the


American


Commissioner in hi


General Adminis-


trative and Jurisdictional Decision


number


other


previous


decisions,


of September


where


1928


claimants


and in a
entirely


competent to look after their own interests in inakin


with their attorneys, it was not contemplated by Congre


a fee agreement


in author-


izing the American Commissioner to fix reasonable fees in those pro-


ceedings,
claimants


that he would disregard an agreement thus reached by the


and


their


attorneys.
C,


The


claimant


in this


case


, having


sought and acted


upon


the advice of an


experienced man


of affairs,


as her son


is shown to


be, in


prosecution


of thi


claim, must


regarded as coming within the class of those fully capable of protect-


ing her own interests when, in


the contingent


agreements


accordance


were


made


with
with


her son'


Mr.


judgment,


Haa


and


Mr.


Savov.
With respect to the agreement with Mr. Ha as, however, it is neces-


sary to take into consideration that the


services contemplated under


that agreement were not fully carried out by him,


because, for reasons


hereinabove stated


Mr.


avoy wa


retained


represent the claim-


ant in


prosecution


of this claim.


Under the


practice


very


gen-


rally recognized by the members of the


is not entitled to the entire fee agreed


Bar, a forwardin


upon by


hini


with


g attorney
the claim-


collection


a claim


and


claimant


states


in effect


that thi


was her understanding


in employing


him.


The American


Commissioner holds, accordingly


that a reasonable fee for Mr. Haas


circums


ta nces


three


and


one-third


cent


total


- .. .. S a


I








fixed


herein


476

exclusive


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

3 1262 08484 1666


these


disbursements,


except


the disbursements included by Mr. Savoy in his fee.


Now


, therefore, in


view of the considerations above set forth, and


of those stated in the general Administrative and Jurisdictional De-


cision and in Administrative Decision No.


II, rendered by the Ameri-


can Commissioner under date of September 28, 1928,


and August 30,


1930,


respectively,


and


after


careful


examination


and


full


consid-


eration of the information furnished in this proceeding by the attor-
neys and the claimant, and by the records of this Commission perti-


nent


The


questions


American


involved,


Commissioner


and


after


decides


due


and


deliberation


fixes


as the


thereon,


reasonable


fee to be


paid by the claimant,


Mrs.


Meta


Berg, in this case, to


attorney, George A. Nugent, a sum equal to five per cent (5%)


of the


amount to
payment of
equal to thl
received by


awar,
cent


received


award


r(


ee and
her fro


and


(10%)


her
her


one-third
m the Tr
attorney,


from


attorney,


per cent


easury
Prew


(8%~


Treasury


Charles
) of
'**%) of


Department


Savoy,


I


of the amount to be received by


a sun
her


Department


Haas,


a sum


amount to


in payment of


equal


from


Treasury


Department in payment of her award, thi aid fees to be paid by the


claimant and received by the attorneys respectively


as full


compen-


station for all services rendered by them in


prosecution


and


col-


election


of this claim, as


defined in Section 9 of the


" Settlement of


War Claims Act of 1928."


Done at


Washington, D.


this 22nd


day of April,


1931.


CHANDLER P.
American
Mised 4
;~i: U w~Pit


ATODSON,
Commissioner,
i"aims Commission,
ed States and Germ


iti


SJ


any.