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

:.Xtf"


.DEI


SiAMERICAN


COMMISSIONER


IXED


CLAIMS


COMMISSION


ED


STATES


AND


GERMANY


DECISION NO.


H:


"i f'. *.

- S UNABLE
k"


IN THE MATTER OF


FEES


FOR


ATTORNEYS


OR


iDER


THE


AUTHORITY


SECTION


9 OF


tEEMENT OF WAR CLAIMS ACT OF 1928"


I~:;
L r
k.:


DOCKET


Tnust


NO.


8093


Company,


Claimant


rL.
~I--

SIL


.Nippert &e Brown, Attorneys


g IA NDLER

.. American


ANDERSON,


Commissioner


tI
i~I.
*iH!".
I! '~.


.... .. .....


'taWattointic


a
m

.


. ."


WHISiliRis.


































M:L,:^"r 4 :
Thj+
:~ 1'
V ';:
"" o
ttiv
Th: : :E~
:,:~Eb







~A"h:
Thy>B
i~ r


IJXED CLAIMS


COMMISSION.


UNITED STATES


Established in pursuance of the Agreement between
United States and Germany of August 10, 19




S* Ameiac#t O Oonmisrineer"


(1zJ


E ":







.! 1A
.hi~.
LI.;...
ktri


AMERICAN


COMMISSIONER


'C:



....- V.
lilT 'hA


MIXED


ITED


CLAIMS


STATES


COMMISSION


AND


REASONABLE


FEES


FOR


ATTORNEYS


UNDER


THE


AUTHORITY


SECTION


9 OF


..fSETTLEMENT OF WAR CLAIMS
l if ..I" V" .
..1 *.1 .*
i 'i!ii ** I'


ACT OF 1928"


~i.... I
rrI9%


I..
H!.4iah


DOCKET


Transatlanmtic


Trust


Nippert <&


NO.


8093


Company,


Brown, Attorneys


.:I se,


an award


was


made


by this


Commission


on May


Half of the above-named claimant,


for bank balances


II.:: .


Ipaly


amounting


$157,092.44,


*i *** ":. ..... .... ..
klof certain of its stockholders, and
* .-. u -


amounting to


01$ 0,8 12.30,


" for the sole


and


exclusive


for a bank balance in


representing coupons


collected,


::.benefit of its customers who


were owners


securities


~'" 'it


Deutsche


Bank


name


GERMANY


DECISION NO.


IN THE MATTER OF


.trt


illl:::.


a


-3C .= =


.==


Clc~inzant


.w n ..






386


which


claimant


an application


addressed


a rehearing

American


might


have


4joiiirissioiier


letter:


In the Matter of Transathatic Trust Company


List No. p296; and the


Award there of $100,812.30 to the
Transatlantic Trust Company for the
benefit of its customers.


In accordance


with


the provisions


War


Clair SeU


corporation respectfully requests


that


the fees


of Npiert &


peared


on behalf


of this


company


before


the Commissiioin,


Commissioner.


This


without


company


fixing


requested


Nippert


in advance


Brown
since 1


claim


of RUJnDeous parties other than


company.


company


received


Nippet & Brown, for payment upon


based on a contingency
payment of the award.


feels that this amount is fair


reasonable


feels, i vi ew of the numerous parties in


for the


beneficial


interest


priate for the Commissioner to fix a proper fee judicially before the company's


acceptance


ippert & Brown


accede


payment.


company


in the propriety


would


submission


payment.


On May


14, 1929,


the American


Commissioner wrote to the claim-


ant calling attention to the provisions of Section 9 of


War


Claims


Act


authorizing


him


iii ;i
r,
:E
j"i~:~ :,: "B ::
":E
~E"P,,
~1 ,
:":E :E:
"".j: :"
;;i ,,,
iP;,
5~i::r;i:;
k
ric: ";;
:":,

..
I;: :
:E


"":

1
r
,E
~


uon the written request of the claimant fid befti
of ninety days after the date of mailin" the notice


'I


0


therein and added:


Inasmuch as sunh notice has not yet been sent to y


8th is not strictly in compliance with the provisions of thA
however, will be sent to you in due course and, after its reiei
npnrrlinrlv within ninty duava frnim tho rnftp of itm ynilinoh hv ma filma v


^"E: ""
Ei
""F:""
i":
"""


________________________________________


E ""*, X:
,,,


L'







387


take


the action


authorized


the aforesaid


provisions.


"this unofficial prior notice numerous requests for fixing attorney's
:FH *: .
HiP1ed by claimants with the American Commissioner before his official
taimailed.


gpe cases
'AI .:,:


American


in order


iAt be filed
tirements


to comply


Commissioner


strictly with


with him after the


of the Act


that


receipt


such


notice


notified


the claimants


the terms of the Act,
of his official notice,


must


be filed


that


that a
in view


" before


ninety


days


after


the date


mailing


of such


notice "


Hi! 1nfljs.iofle


Itwhliether


Rldasi. a new
t- -


:1'
21i
1-**'*


did not have occasion


or not the


request


. ill desired


avoid rais


requests


was


filed


that this action


previously
I response
be taken


of these cases


filed


to his


were


void


suggestion


to rule
because


that


this _procedure be adopted


ing any question as to the effectiveness of the claimant's


1F*i e l 1929, the claimant addressed to the American Commis-

t duplicate signed copy of its previous letter of May 8, 1929.


..."
." ."-.8


7, 1929,
official


American


notice,


pursuant


Commissioner


mailed


provisions


Section


above-mentioned Act.


This notice expressly stated


claimants
or have


are satisfied


already


paid


with


the fees charged


for such


services,


their


it is neither


attorneys
necessary


rpriate for claimants


to request


the Commissi


owner


to fix such


fees.


4i:Oitemplates that fees shall be fixed only where there is disagreement
nts and attorneys.
*M.. Shall be fixed under this subsection unless written request therefore


h tthe undersigned


before


the expiration


of ninety


days


after


*" ::i !.: ..: aE
*,,,, *,* ." *
t'vfboe.
:* .. .E .E:* ...
.. 4" ** ,


bHoJ tzne 13
:: ;:: ': : x" ". "


of this notice,


1929,


which period is to be computed from the date


the claimant acknowledged


receipt of this


further


communication


been


received


from


1929,


prior to


receipt of


aforesaid


notice


iiI.".-


H 7


ARi


rrr


mm


-a--







388

Last spring, pursuant to the request of Transatlantic Trust Company


iof award,


List No.


6296 that


you fix a


fair and


te submitted aidai and statement
At the present trit the l'reasury is


Trust Comp~iny


thrreto.


Such


for distribute


stribution


not pI


* of services.
preparing to ma. n
-"
ion among the several Del
possible, however, bore t


advised by you as to the fee fixed.
The Coznpany, as our application states,


P
I
"i,,J:E
E
i
,r

rl
iii*:*" E",
"
ij
i ix
:
%"r":;i
r:
(
s"
~"",r .":


is not


retained


retained by it on behalf of numerous parties in interest to the a
the understanding that the fee would be left to the American


May we therefore, request you,


not only on our own'behalf, uin thi


Numerous persons awaiting distribution of the award, t~
por decibon on the amount of the fee to which we are entitled


On November 30, 1929, the


American


Commissioner replied,


ing attention to the failure of the claimant


e American


with the


COommissioner and


e was not authoried to take any


informing them that
action in this claim.


A copy of this letter was sent to the claimant herein.

On December 6, 1929, the attorneys replied, stating that: --

it wotld seem to us that the maihlig of such notice is not jurisdictionSi
ea te the right to have fee fixed which is granted by the statute but that 1
mailing of sch notie merely cuts off the right made inherent by the stalt
t a ninety-day period.
::On this interpretation we would suggest that the comp y
ifd before ninety days after receipt of such notice although it was Aed.


to uuh notice,


. This letter
: othS we and3
impartialHy by


rr


further
the comr


stated:
any are anions thl
lyareU


reasons


see, if the ,fee is not fixed in such impartial


and t paid


would


much


s we have sta
way, such fee a
disoussilorn


of the award and since the distribution of the award will be complicate


agreement sply because,


we were


requirement


;
~RiE^5EE E^" :
rl:
B ",
i"
;;
";
: "i,
~i;;'ii;


,i(
x
:: :I


Commissioner


become the subject of


while


vf


f


U







389


thus


appears


that


in the


instant


case,


upon


receipt


..laimrant'
lt unmissj
W nation
H i


first request to have its attorneys' fees fixed


owner


informed


of ninety


claimant


days after the


date


that it


of the


should,


mailing


, the American
before the ex-


an official


tice, file its written


that


request


claimant


that a


second


reasonable


request


dated


June


fxed in
1, 1929,


this
also


H...


SiMtedated
: i:') i" .'. "
IE"8flowinS
.::: .: :: *'
a claim
Ifil!evious r


j.e.. mu,
~ .: :.
laimant


Commi


ssioner


official notice


the receipt of the Commissioner'


and


notice


that


on June


, mailed June 7th,


ant merely acknowledged its receipt without confirming its


requests to have the attorney':


noted


I


was


claimant
satisfied


further


that


in paragraph


with


fees


fees fixed.


Commissioner'


numbered


official


that


charged


notice


in case


attorneys,


t Was not necessary or appropriate for it to request the Commissioner
i'- fix such fees. and. in Da.raaraoh numbered 3. that the Act re-


.. ....i ."". .
q:::. uires t
'l-
.. ."".J Z
5! anthorize
1enjn-n rm n-
.. i .. -

orioiener br
i i. ailing
:..*1 .* Tie f
. .. .. : ... .
S. :. 1".:. .id t n i
, <: .. :::.:H : w
S:'** *:. .
.-.; .* *

.: ...i :.i.:ee sp a
,- --- **:: ,' ,*
ft:* : : :* ".,.* .
^ *.:.:* **.. .:***.


requests
attorneys


d the claimant,
unless written


before


made


make


such


claimants


requests"


The


in paragraph numbered 7


request


expiration


of the notice,


Lct that


Sioner


therefore was


ninety


days


filed


and


" does


notice


further


that no fee would


with


after


Commis-


date


June 7, 1929.


claimant


that


, prior to June


asked


and the further fact that


sent


on June


notice


claimant


without


renewing


7th,


attorneys


after the


merely


had informed


was


" fair


and


Commissioner'


acknowledged


premature


or confirming


: .
:: : *::.:. ..
i :." .
Hii:;


quests,
* : desired.
. .OUt7*r
\.v l. U*


were taken by the Commissioner to mean that no action was


The Commissioner also


felt justified in assuming that, in


view of


HA1he rather guarded way in which the claimant'


original request was


H~~fkaa


Slam a n+. i


.gflhl


..~a ** I** 'I ..


a ithnri z.r


init.in.t'a


this


a11:|S1 !!


ii i:


st


I r r I


.* .


IIII. rri ~,


. a






390


and v
Comm


ri th


understanding


that


would


be left


American


issioner.


The claimant and


the attorneys a


well seem


have been


unable


determine definitely in their own minds whether or not the claim-
ant was authorized to act for the beneficiaries under the item in the


awaward
S6es


for the


come


benefit of


within


to determine


its cu


homers


jurisdiction


under the authority


but


this


is a question


of the Am erpano
conferred urpon hit


e fees of attorneys employed by claimants.


It will


be observed, however, that it is immaterial


whether


claimant


was


entitled


beneficiaries


under i


.award because in neither case can this proceeding be maintain


If the claimant has authority to act for the beneciaries,


declaration


that the


yas claimant
American Con


asked by these


the end


imissioner so


mattel


attorneys
: under t


satisfac
rulings


far as this proceeding is concerned.


O
the
empI
mise


in the


,other


hand,


if the


claimant


had


authority


to avAa


beneficiaries, then its request to have fixed the fees of its attor


sooner


their behalf does not confer upon thte Amerai


jurisdiction


take


such


action


under


proviso


perhaps,
anad why
he Amer


of the "ettlement of War Claims Act of


the reason


why the claimant'


premature


request


ican Commissioner"


Furthermore, t
t &cutomers


was


1928."


This is


-L ~-r T fli


s request was not more c
not subsequently renewed


lenm


notice was received.


he records of the American Agency


the c laimant


how that some


presented separate oiun


Commission, and


were represented by attorneys other than the attor-


neys herein,


and that the claims so presented


were dismissed because


- they were covered by the award made for the benefit of the customers


in this case.


The record


further show that the attorneys for certain


of these customers have


entered


an aDuearance


hPfnre


Treasrirv


.-r -u a u 1 -a


,B


^







391


iaimant could not


properly


fixed


without


givmgg


attorneys


ployed by customers an opportunity to be heard.
!;. :\ :' "


ever, to bring these other attorneys


in making


award


this


iuse,


hi a complete list of the claimant'


a


into


Commission


customers


It is impossible,


present


was
who


proceeding

furnished


are


benefit


*..:::: ":. ..
i"... er the a

pIvprdingly
aries or

,a, ition to 1


ward


claimant


and


American


has no official information of the identity


the attorneys entitled


undertake fee fixing proceedin


Commissioner

of these bene-


represent them, and is not in a


on their behalf.


IMoreover,


as stated


the attorneys'


letter


of December


1929,


quoted above,
: .


"It is, of


J 1


with


course,


the company


true that we can still fix the fee by


or if


necessary


have


fee fixed


court on


uit brought


by us


against


the company"


is also


plpassible that an amicable adjustment may be arrived at between these

Bi .Eorneys, and the attorneys representing the customers of the claim-

!iX:| who have appeared before the Treasury Department in opposi-
4on to the payment of this award, pending a settlement of the rights
iot "all interested parties.
H:i! ,


H. ...::...
l. ,, ,, ,,,,
,,, ,
q.ni... .
,,:: ,,,.
i,,, ,
,


.As pointed out by the American Commissioner in his Decision No.
i.


26, in a similar fee fixing proceeding,


The primary purpose of the fee-fixing provisions of the


" Settlement of War


,:," ,,
i :.N .


I.: .. ..
I.... ;.....


Claims Act of 1928


was to prevent the collection of excessive fees by attorneys


and to fix reasonable fees for them in cases of dispute.


fully accomplished in


aSupreme Court and,


merely authorizes and
g "


this case


by the proceedings pending in


This purpose will be


the New


York


inasmuch as the Settlement of War Claims Act of 1928"


does not direct the American


Comm


issioner to fix rea-


*i.
li i. -
::..'.. ......
I.:
*
!* ...* "* ..
ii .:: *
:n : : ": **"
,a ,, ,,, ,,
,,,,,, ::1 ,,, ,
i E E E:.::: : "P
iii::I: |::: ."I"
,,,,,,,,, ,, ,,.
,,,, ,,,,,,


Ratible fees, it rests in his discretion


in this case,


to refuse to take such action when, as


the result desired by Congress in enacting this legislation will be


fullyy accomplished without his intervention.


In11


Wt
hdL'~m I:.


view of these considerations,


the American


Commissioner


without passing upon the reasonableness of the


con-


fees charged


these attorneys, that it is not desirable or aDDroDriate for him to


S*. :: .l *
e.: "'


ayr=:


,


.
"


*
:
.




C- C


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

l lll lll i1 llMllllrillllllllIlillE
3 1262 08484 1856


I:!
Ai


m.