BMG Investment Company v. Continental/Moss Gordin, Inc.
| Decision Date | 19 February 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 29174.,29174. |
| Citation | 437 F.2d 892 |
| Parties | B-M-G INVESTMENT COMPANY, and Duncan Boeckman, Trustee, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CONTINENTAL/MOSS GORDIN, INC., Fulton Industries, Inc., and Allied Products Corporation, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Morris I. Jaffe, Wynne, Jaffe & Finsley, Dallas, Tex., for defendants-appellants.
George G. Potts, Hawkins Golden, Golden, Burrow, Potts & Boeckman, Dallas, Tex., for plaintiffs-appellees.
Before GEWIN, MORGAN and ADAMS*, Circuit Judges.
In this case appellees (as plaintiffs below) brought suit, alleging an event of default under a Purchase Agreement and seeking acceleration of maturity of the guaranteed part of an obligation, requesting declaratory judgment as to interpretation of a provision of the Purchase Agreement and seeking attorneys' fees. In an opinion which discusses thoroughly the facts and issues of law, see D.C., 320 F.Supp. 968, the district court granted appellees' motion for summary judgment as to the Purchase Agreement in issue, holding that the rights of the appellees thereunder were clear and unambiguous, and further holding that the construction of the contract was for the court without resort to extrinsic evidence. We agree with the district court that the case was proper for summary judgment, but disallow the amount of $125,000 attorneys' fees as awarded by the court below.
A perusal of the record indicates that, although by the standards of most attorneys, the case constitutes "big litigation", it has to be borne in mind that there has been no trial in this case, no introduction of evidence or examination of witnesses except on the subject of attorneys' fees,1 no protracted conferences or meetings between the counsel for the parties, and less than one day in the courtroom before summary judgment was granted.
We are cognizant that fees to be allowed attorneys is a matter for the sound discretion of the trial judge and should not be set aside unless an abuse of discretion is made plainly to appear. See Connecticut Importing Co. v. Frankfort Distilleries, 2 Cir., 101 F.2d 79.
However, appellate courts, as trial courts, are themselves experts as to the reasonableness of attorneys' fees, and may, in the interest of justice, fix the fees of counsel albeit in disagreement on the evidence with the views of the trial court. Mercantile-Commerce B. & T. Co. v. S. E. Arkansas L. Dist., 8 Cir., 1939, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Austin Mun. Securities, Inc. v. National Ass'n of Securities Dealers, Inc.
...v. Continental Moss-Gordin, Inc., 320 F.Supp. 968, 972 (N.D.Tex.1969), aff'd on issue cited and remanded in part on other issue, 437 F.2d 892, 893 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 989, 91 S.Ct. 1668, 29 L.Ed.2d 154 (1971). The NASD by-law provision by itself fails to meet these The agreem......
-
Copeland v. Marshall
...485 (D.C. Cir. 1980).43 See, e. g., In re TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc., 577 F.2d 1296, 1304 (5th Cir. 1978); B-M-G Inv. Co. v. Continental/Moss Gordin, Inc., 437 F.2d 892, 893 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 989, 91 S.Ct. 1668, 29 L.Ed.2d 154 (1971).44 See, e. g., Firefighters Institute for R......
-
Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc.
...¶ 54.77. This Court, however, may review the District Court's determination as to a reasonable fee. B-M-G Investment Co. v. Continental/Moss Gordin, Inc., 437 F.2d 892, 893 (5th Cir. 1971). It is under this authority that we undertake to review the award in this The reasonableness of the aw......
-
TMT Trailer Ferry, Inc., Matter of
...its own prerogative in establishing the fees and expenses herein, as we pointed out in B-M-G Investment Company, etc. v. Continental/Moss Gordin, Inc., et al., 5 Cir., 1971, 437 F.2d 892, 893: (A)ppellate courts, as trial courts, are themselves experts as to the reasonableness of attorneys'......