Norris v. Green, Civ. A. No. 9868.
| Citation | 317 F. Supp. 100 |
| Decision Date | 26 October 1965 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 9868. |
| Parties | M. E. NORRIS et al., for the Use and Benefit of Local No. 92, International Association of Bridge, Structural, and Ornamental Iron Workers, AFL-CIO, an unincorporated association, doing business as a Labor Organization, Plaintiffs, v. C. H. GREEN et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama |
C. V. Stelzenmuller, of Thomas, Taliaferro, Forman, Burr & Murray, James L. Shores, and E. W. Weir, Birmingham, Ala., for plaintiffs.
Douglas Corretti, of Corretti, Newsom & Rogers, and Jerry Lorant, Birmingham, Ala., for defendants.
OPINION AND FINDINGS
This is an action under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, better known as the Landrum-Griffin Act. 29 U.S.C.A. 401 et seq.
By order of the 27th of June, 1962, Charles H. Moses, Jr. was appointed Special Master to hear, determine and report the matters and issues detailed in said order. On the 2nd day of November 1964, the Special Master filed his report. On May 28, 1965, an order was entered overruling the exceptions to the extent indicated in the order, and sustaining same in other respects. It was directed that a further hearing be had to determine: (1) the amount of the Special Master's fee and its taxation; (2) the amount of the attorney's fee to be allotted from the recovery; and (3) the present necessity for injunctive relief. Such hearing was held on the 6th day of October 1965. All parties were represented by counsel. The Special Master appeared in person.
Section 501(b) of the Landrum-Griffin Act provides, inter alia, that:
"The trial judge may allot a reasonable part of the recovery in any action under this subsection to pay the fees of counsel prosecuting the suit at the instance of the member of the labor organization and to compensate such member for any expenses necessarily paid or incurred by him in connection with the litigation."
The quoted subsection does not limit the award of counsel fees and expenses to the monetary recovery procured by the plaintiff. Where other relief inures to the benefit of the Union, an award therefor may be made from Union funds. Bakery and Confectionery Workers International Union v. Ratner, 118 U.S. App.D.C. 269, 335 F.2d 691.
The award in this case is in the amount of $9,764.14 against the defendant C. H. Green and in the amount of $9,702.29 against the defendant H. L. Thacker. Based upon the criteria for determining attorney's fees1 the Court finds that the firm of Thomas, Taliaferro, Forman, Burr & Murray, counsel for the plaintiffs, is entitled to a fee of $15,000.00 for reasonable and necessary services rendered in respect to the entire litigation here involved, including benefits accruing to the Union apart from those rendered solely in respect to the monetary recovery.
Plaintiffs' attorneys incurred reasonable and necessary expenses on behalf of the plaintiffs in the course of this litigation in the amount of $729.47.
Plaintiffs through their attorneys employed the firm of Dent & Corr, certified public accountants, to assist their counsel in examining the records of the Union preliminary to the filing of this action and in developing the accounting data for the prosecution of the claims asserted in the action. The services of the accountants and their assistants were reasonably necessary in view of the complicated and involved facts and circumstances confronting the plaintiffs and their counsel. Their charge of $1,216.00 is reasonable.
The Special Master has filed a claim for services of himself and assistants and for expenses incurred by him in the total amount of $3,001.13. His expenses in the amount of $140.88, and the value of the services rendered by him and his assistants in the amount of $2,860.25, are reasonable and were necessary to his proper handling and determination of the issues submitted to him.
Rule 53(a) provides in part that:
"The compensation to be allowed to a master shall be fixed by the court, and shall be charged upon such of the parties or paid out of any fund or subject matter of the action, which is in the custody and control of the court as the court may direct."
In the Federal Court masters' fees are determinable by the Court and taxed by the clerk as costs. United States v. Bethlehem Steel Corp. (E.D. Pa.) 26 F.Supp. 259. It is only right and essential that officers of the Court receive the compensation due them, Valenstein v. Bayonne Bolt Corp. (E.D.N.Y.) 6 F.R.D. 363, and, accordingly, the allowance may be imposed as a charge upon both parties, although the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
General Adjudication of All Rights to Use Water in the Big Horn River System, In re, s. 85-203
...that "costs against A number of federal cases have indicated that costs include the special master's fees and expenses. Norris v. Green, 317 F.Supp. 100 (N.D.Ala.1965); K-2 Ski Co. v. Head Ski Co., Inc., 506 F.2d 471 (9th Cir.1974); Capra, Inc. v. Ward Foods, Inc., supra 567 F.2d 1316 (5th ......
-
In re Rights to Use Water in Big Horn River
...53(a), F.R.C.P. A number of federal cases have indicated that costs include the special master's fees and expenses. Norris v. Green, 317 F. Supp. 100 (N.D.Ala. 1965); K-2 Ski Co. v. Head Ski Co., Inc., 506 F.2d 471 (9th Cir.1974); Capra, Inc. v. Ward Foods, Inc., supra 567 F.2d 1316 (5th Ci......
-
West Virginia University Hospitals, Inc v. Casey
...meaning and to define a term of art. 6. The hospital also cites Fairley v. Patterson, 493 F.2d 598 (CA5 1974), and Norris v. Green, 317 F.Supp. 100, 102 (ND Ala.1965). But in Fairley the court, remanding for reconsideration of the fee award, was explicitly equivocal as to whether "court cos......
-
Gary W. v. State of La.
...F.2d 1316, 1323-24 (5th Cir. 1978). Accord, K-2 Ski Co. v. Head Ski Co., 506 F.2d 471, 476-77 (9th Cir. 1974); Norris v. Green, 317 F.Supp. 100, 102-03 (N.D.Ala.1965). See also Newman v. Alabama, 559 F.2d at 290. Given the District Court's finding in 1976 that the State of Louisiana had vio......