Beardsley v. Cockerell
| Decision Date | 28 April 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. Misc. 8-65.,Misc. 8-65. |
| Citation | 240 F. Supp. 845 |
| Parties | Melville W. BEARDSLEY v. Christopher S. COCKERELL (two cases). |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia |
Irving R. M. Panzer, Washington, D. C., for A. Fred Starobin.
Francis C. Browne, Browne, Schuyler & Beveridge, Washington, D. C., for Melville W. Beardsley.
This was a motion on behalf of A. Fred Starobin, an Attorney at Law, to quash two subpoenas duces tecum served upon him by Melville W. Beardsley, a party in the above-captioned proceedings.
Testimony and argument were heard on March 5, 1965, and counsel were invited to submit briefs. The briefs having been considered, and the testimony weighed, the Court ruled that the subpoenas should be quashed.
Pursuant to Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court separately states its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. A. Fred Starobin is an attorney and a member of the bar of the District of Columbia, having been admitted to practice on December 3, 1956.
2. (a) Since his admission to the bar, Starobin has been continuously in the private practice of law, maintaining his own office and paying all his own office expenses. (b) Since the latter part of 1959, his office has been in the Munsey Building, Washington, D. C.; before that time he used the services of an answering service at 734 15th Street, N. W., to receive mail and telephone calls and to rent rooms in which to confer with clients.
3. At all times since he has been in the private practice of law, Starobin has had clients other than National Research Associates, Inc.
4. (a) In the latter part of 1958, Starobin began to do work for a corporation named National Research Associates, Inc. (b) The President of the corporation at that time was William Alper; the Vice President at that time was Melville W. Beardsley, who at times also served as Treasurer and later as President of the corporation. Mr. Alper and Mr. Beardsley were the co-founders of the corporation, and together they owned then — and still own at this time — a majority of all the outstanding stock of the corporation. (c) Beardsley was the inventor in a number of patent applications for devices called "air cushion vehicles", around which the business of National Research Associates, Inc., was formed.
5. At all times, the office of National Research Associates, Inc., was in Maryland, originally in College Park and subsequently in Laurel.
6. The work performed by Starobin for National Research Associates, Inc. beginning in the latter part of 1958, consisted of three different services — legal patent work; legal non-patent work; and serving as Secretary of the corporation. For doing all of this work, Starobin was to receive the sum of $100.00 per week, for which he was to devote such amount of time to the corporation as in his estimation would be applicable to compensation of $100.00 per week. Social security payments and income tax were withheld by the corporation from the $100.00 per week compensation.
7. Starobin performed the above-described services for the corporation, at the agreed compensation of $100.00 per week, until June of 1962. At that time, he informed the officers of the corporation that his work for the corporation, particularly the legal patent work, had increased to the extent that it was interfering with his work for other clients and the compensation of $100.00 per week arrangement was insufficient to compensate him adequately.
8. In June of 1962, pursuant to the discussion noted in paragraph 7 above, Starobin entered into an agreement with the corporation, acting through Alper and Beardsley (the principal officers of the corporation), on a new arrangement for compensation for his services, under which Starobin's legal patent work would be compensated entirely separately and independently from any other services he performed for the corporation. He was to bill the corporation for his legal patent services on a time basis as an attorney, wholly apart from any other services performed for the corporation, and the compensation was not subject to social security or income tax withholding.
9. By two Powers of Attorney, one dated July 26, 1962, the other dated July 30, 1962, Beardsley appointed Starobin to be his attorney in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Matters of Browy
...third parties (In re Professional Hockey Antitrust Litigation (Multidist, Lit.), 371 F.Supp. 742 (E.D.Pa.1974); Beardsley v. Cockerell,240 F.Supp. 845 (D.D.C.1965)), and the trustee in bankruptcy. In re San Juan Gold, Inc., supra. It makes no difference that San Juan Gold was a reorganizati......
-
In re Garcia
...some cases which state that a retaining lien is valid as to third parties. See Matter of Browy, 527 F.2d at 801; Beardsley v. Cockerell, 240 F.Supp. 845, 848 (D.D.C.1965). Indeed, the trustee in bankruptcy is a third party to whom the retaining lien applies. Nevertheless, I conclude that a ......
-
In re Coudert Brothers LLP, Case No. 06-12226(RDD) (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 11/21/2007), Case No. 06-12226(RDD).
...common law retaining lien on any client property in their possession for unpaid legal fees and expenses. Beardsley v. Cockerell, 240 F. Supp. 845, 848 (D. D.C. 1965); DC Bar Legal Ethics Comm. Op. 230 (September 15, 1992) ("DC Bar Opinion 230"). Such a "retaining lien attaches to property o......
-
Anthony v. Bitler, 95 C 3820.
...unencumbered discovery and equitable administration of justice. Although this court notes that Browy cited to Beardsley v. Cockerell, 240 F.Supp. 845, 848 (D.D.C.1965) which held that the lien is enforceable as to third parties without qualification, this court favors the balancing rule art......