Ask the Scholar

Page 1 of 4
I can add historical knowledge about this page.

Page image

Page 1

OCR

COLLINS & CORBIN COUNSELLORS AT LAW CLEMENT K. CORBIN ROBERT J. BAIN EDWARD A. MARKLEY CHARLES w. BROADHURST HOWARD F. MCINTYRE JAMES B. EMORY JAN 2 1935 1 EXCHANGE PLACE, JERSEY CITY, N.J. PATRICK F. MC DEVITT JOHN F. LEONARD JAMES J. LANGAN ADOLPH s. HUMMEL RAYMOND J. LAMB EARLE J. HARRINGTON STANLEY G. BROOKS December 31, 1935. Vincent P. La Porte, Admr. ad pros. etc. VS. United States Radium Corp. Chas. Stockdell Gray, Esq., Counsel, Globe Indemnity Co., 20 Washington Place, Newark, N. J. Howard H. Barker, Esq., Vice Pres., United States Radium Co. 535 Pearl Street, New York City. Gentlemen: On last Friday, December 27, 1935, at Trenton, I appeared before Judge Forman upon presentation of final decree in the above equity suit. Mr. Emmerglick appe ared for the plaintiff, Mr. Smith for the New Amsterdam Casualt y Company, Mr. Gray and I for the Globe Indemnity Company and Mr. Barker for the United States Radium Corporation. The form of decree as presented was not objected to either by the court or by Mr. Enmerglick, but the court brought up the subject of providing compensation to a limited degree for Mr. Emmerglick, counsel for the plaintiff and also to provide for payment of his dis- bursements. In fact, this matter had been called to the attention of counsel by the court before attending at Trenton, so that they might give it consideration. I prepared a memorandum on the legal right of the court to compel the United States Radium Corporation to make payment of the counsel fee and disbursements. While the law is not entirely clear it seems to be fairly clear that the e ourt has no right to allow a counsel fee to the defeated party as against the preva iling party. For instance, in the case of Higgins V. Baton, 204 Fed. 273 C.C.A. 2d Circuit) the court said: "Costs can seldom be awarded against a prevailing party unless he has been guilty of some fault or omission. In the case of Hodgman, et al V. Atlantic Refining Co., 20 Fed (2d) 949, the District Court for the District of Delaware held that while the allowance of costs was discretionary, that that discretion is not an arbitrary one. "In its discretion this court must be governed by the rule pertaining thereto. The general principle is that in suits in equity as in actions at law, the prevailing party is entitled to costs. This principle must be applied

Page data

Page
1
Source index
0
Type
photo
Media ID
285a2ed7ddd89ff4
Size
unknown

Document data

ID
75729209
Core
doc
Type
document
DTO data
{
    "id": "75729209",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729209",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Letters Received to Chas. Stockdell Gray, Howard H. Barker [H.H. Barker], December 31, 1935",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729209",
    "collections": [
        "Safety Light Collection",
        "Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003289_Page_1.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003289_Page_1.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003289_Page_1.jpg",
    "imageCount": 4,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

Context sent to Scholar

Document identity
{
    "localId": "75729209",
    "label": "Letters Received to Chas. Stockdell Gray, Howard H. Barker [H.H. Barker], December 31, 1935",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729209"
}
Document source metadata
{
    "id": "75729209",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729209",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Letters Received to Chas. Stockdell Gray, Howard H. Barker [H.H. Barker], December 31, 1935",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729209",
    "collections": [
        "Safety Light Collection",
        "Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003289_Page_1.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003289_Page_1.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003289_Page_1.jpg",
    "imageCount": 4,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729209",
    "naId": 75729209,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003289_Page_1.jpg",
    "mediaId": "285a2ed7ddd89ff4",
    "ocrText": "COLLINS & CORBIN\nCOUNSELLORS AT LAW\nCLEMENT K. CORBIN\nROBERT J. BAIN\nEDWARD A. MARKLEY\nCHARLES w. BROADHURST\nHOWARD F. MCINTYRE JAMES B. EMORY\nJAN 2 1935\n1 EXCHANGE PLACE,\nJERSEY CITY, N.J.\nPATRICK F. MC DEVITT\nJOHN F. LEONARD\nJAMES J. LANGAN\nADOLPH s. HUMMEL\nRAYMOND J. LAMB\nEARLE J. HARRINGTON\nSTANLEY G. BROOKS\nDecember 31, 1935.\nVincent P. La Porte, Admr. ad pros. etc. VS.\nUnited States Radium Corp.\nChas. Stockdell Gray, Esq.,\nCounsel, Globe Indemnity Co.,\n20 Washington Place,\nNewark, N. J.\nHoward H. Barker, Esq.,\nVice Pres., United States Radium Co.\n535 Pearl Street,\nNew York City.\nGentlemen:\nOn last Friday, December 27, 1935, at Trenton, I\nappeared before Judge Forman upon presentation of final decree\nin the above equity suit. Mr. Emmerglick appe ared for the\nplaintiff, Mr. Smith for the New Amsterdam Casualt y Company,\nMr. Gray and I for the Globe Indemnity Company and Mr. Barker\nfor the United States Radium Corporation. The form of decree\nas presented was not objected to either by the court or by Mr.\nEnmerglick, but the court brought up the subject of providing\ncompensation to a limited degree for Mr. Emmerglick, counsel\nfor the plaintiff and also to provide for payment of his dis-\nbursements. In fact, this matter had been called to the\nattention of counsel by the court before attending at Trenton,\nso that they might give it consideration.\nI prepared a memorandum on the legal right of the\ncourt to compel the United States Radium Corporation to make\npayment of the counsel fee and disbursements. While the law is\nnot entirely clear it seems to be fairly clear that the e ourt\nhas no right to allow a counsel fee to the defeated party as\nagainst the preva iling party. For instance, in the case of\nHiggins V. Baton, 204 Fed. 273 C.C.A. 2d Circuit) the court\nsaid:\n\"Costs can seldom be awarded against a prevailing party\nunless he has been guilty of some fault or omission.\nIn\nthe\ncase of Hodgman, et al V. Atlantic Refining Co., 20 Fed (2d) 949,\nthe District Court for the District of Delaware held that while\nthe allowance of costs was discretionary, that that discretion\nis not an arbitrary one. \"In its discretion this court must be\ngoverned by the rule pertaining thereto. The general principle\nis that in suits in equity as in actions at law, the prevailing\nparty is entitled to costs. This principle must be applied"
}