People v. Federal Bank

The People of the State of New York v. The Federal Bank of New York, Defendant Leo Schlesinger, as Receiver of The Federal Bank of New York, and Others, Attorneys for Said Receiver

People v. Fed. Bank, 114 A.D. 374 (1906)

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided: July 12, 1906
Citations: 114 A.D. 374100 N.Y.S. 441906 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2106

Cited by 0

Headnotes

Attorney and client — when Special Term, cannot reduce stipulated compensation of attorney. When parties to an action have «stipulated as to the amount attorneys shall receive as compensation, the Special Term cannot reduce the amount so long as the stipulation remains in force.

Summary

Appeal by Leo Schlesinger, as receiver of The Federal Bank of New York, and others, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 16th day of May, 1906, as modifies the report of a referee by reducing the compensation allowed to the receiver’s attorneys from $20,000 to $15,000.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam :

It would seem from the course of the trial before the referee that it was practically stipulated that the claimants’ compensation should be fixed at $20,000. The People, represented by the Attorney-General, and the claimants were the only parties to .the reference. Any stipulation they may have made the Special Term could not disturb while it remained in force. This being so, the action of the Special Term in reducing that amount to $15,000 was unwarranted. The order appealed from should be reversed and the report of the referee confirmed, without costs.

Present—O’Brien, P. J., Patterson, McLaughlin, Laughlin and. Houghton, JJ.

Order reversed and report of referee confirmed, without costs. Order filed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list