Case ID: f_211/html/0238-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HAND, District Judge", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re HAMMEL et al.
    (District Court, S. D. New York.
    February 19, 1914.)
    1. Bankruptcy (§ 482)—Costs and Fees—Allowance to Bankrupt’s Attorney.
    Under Bankruptcy Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, § 64b, subsec. 3, 30 Stat. 563 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3447), authorizing the allowance of a reasonable attorney’s fee for professional services actually rendered to the bankrupt in involuntary cases while performing the duties therein prescribed, and section 7, subsec. 1, providing that the bankrupt shall attend the first meeting of his creditors, if directed by the court or judge to do so, and the hearing upon his application for a discharge, if filed, and subsection 9, providing that he shall, when present at the first meeting of his creditors and at such other times as the court shall order, submit to an examination concerning the conduct of his business, etc., an attorney’s fee cannot, in ordinary cases, be allowed the bankrupt for attending the first meeting or the hearing on the application for the discharge, since his duty is only to answer truthfully, and he requires no attorney to protect him- against abuse of the right of examination, as such right is abused only when it goes into such clearly irrelevant matters as needs no legal expert advice to distinguish, while the fact that the examination takes place before a commissioner or referee sufficiently protects him as to the manner and method of examination.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Bankruptcy, Cent. Dig. §§ 874^876, 897; Dec. Dig. § 482.*]
    2. Bankruptcy (§ 482*)—Costs and Fees—Allowance to Bankrupt’s Attorney.
    •Within Bankruptcy Act July 1, 1898, c. 541, § 64b, subsec. 3, 30 Stat. 563 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3447), authorizing the allowance of a reasonable attorney’s fee for professional services to the bankrupt in involuntary cases while performing the duties therein prescribed, attending a sale of the assets is the bankrupt’s privilege and not a duty.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Bankruptcy, Cent. Dig. §§ 874-876, 897; Dec. Dig. § 482.*]
    3. Bankruptcy (§ 482*)—Costs and Fees—Allowance to Bankrupt’s Attorney.
    ■ Under such section, getting a discharge is not a duty imposed upon the bankrupt.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Bankruptcy, Cent. Dig. §§ 874-876, 897 Dec-. Dig. § 482.*]
    Proceeding in the matter pf Leopold Hammel and another, individually. and as copartners trading as L. Hammel &, Co. On application for allowance as attorney for the bankrupt. Allowance by special master modified.
    Application for allowance as attorney for the bankrupt in an involuntary case. The special master appointed to fix allowances has based an allowance of $125 upon the following services rendered the bankrupt: Preparing and filing schedules, attending sale of bankrupts’ property, consenting to order of adjudication, being present with the bankrupt at the first meeting of creditors, and various adjournments, attending with the bankrupt at examinations of objecting creditors on discharge, consulting with objecting creditors regarding discharge.
    
      Herman H. Oppenheimer, of New York City, for L. Hammel.
    Cahn & Nordlinger, of New York City, for Bertha Hofman.
    I. H. Kramer, of New York City, for Max Hofman.
    Lawrence B. Cohen, of New York City, for receiver.
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   HAND, District Judge

(after stating the facts as above). Section 64b (3) controls in such a case, and limits the allowance to services rendered “to the bankrupt in involuntary cases while performing the duties herein prescribed.” The duties of bankrupts are prescribed in section 7 of the act, of which only subdivisions 1, 8, and 9 are here pertinent. I cannot agree that a bankrupt in ordinary cases needs an attorney to attend at. the hearing of his discharge or at the first meeting. In re Kross (D. C.) 96 Fed. 816. His duty is only to answer truthfully, and that needs no attorney. The theory is, I suppose, that the right of examination may be abused, and that he should be protected, but the abuse of examination can only be when it goes into such clearly irrelevant matters as need no expert legal advice to distinguish. The utmost latitude should be allowed. So far as manner and method of examination may be abused, as such examinations take place before a commissioner or referee, the bankrupt is protected from being misused without an attorney.

Attending a sale of the bankrupt’s assets is his privilege, not his duty.

For preparing the schedules and attendance Judge Brown fixed the fee of $30 for usual cases, with $20 for the discharge. Re Kross, supra. I should prefer to say that, except in unusual cases, the bankrupt should have no lawyer at the hearings and examinations, unless he wishes himself to pay him. Nor can I see that getting a discharge is a duty imposed upon the bankrupt.

■Allowance $50.