From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clark v. Goldman

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Apr 15, 1942
127 F.2d 852 (2d Cir. 1942)

Opinion

No. 85.

April 15, 1942.

On motion to clarify opinion.

Opinion supplemented.

For original opinion, see 124 F.2d 491.

Edward F. Clark and Leonard J. Reynolds, both of New York City, for appellants.

Before L. HAND, CLARK, and FRANK, Circuit Judges.


Both the claimants and the creditors' committee agree that the sum upon which any allowance is to be reckoned should be the share of all non-assenting creditors — secured and unsecured — in any increase in the bid of the creditors' committee which resulted from the claimants' efforts. This is obviously the right amount to take as the base; and the district judge will use it in fixing the allowance, if any. Whether the claimants' efforts did in fact result in any increase in the bid; and if so, how much of that increase should be awarded to the claimants, after taking into consideration what they have already received, are of course for the district court to decide.

The award will come out of funds remaining in the receiver's hands; we had understood that all the funds had been distributed.


Summaries of

Clark v. Goldman

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Apr 15, 1942
127 F.2d 852 (2d Cir. 1942)
Case details for

Clark v. Goldman

Case Details

Full title:CLARK et al. v. GOLDMAN et al

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Apr 15, 1942

Citations

127 F.2d 852 (2d Cir. 1942)

Citing Cases

Warren v. Palmer

See Medill, Fees and Expenses in a Corporate Reorganization under Section 77B, 34 Mich.L.Rev. 331, 347.…

United States v. American Society of Composers

In Nolte v. Hudson Nav. Co., 47 F.2d 166, 167 (2d Cir. 1931), this court held that attorneys whose efforts…