The Covington leader. (Covington, Tenn.) 18??-current, 1922-08-24


Made to Referee In Bankruptcy
Removal Of Trustee Harrell and
Attorneys is Asked.
Mr.. c. L. Marsilliott, referee in
bankruptcy in the federal court at
Memphis has recommended the re-
moyal OF j. E. Harrell, who resides
at Dyersburg, as trustee in the bank
ruptcy proceedings instituted several
months ago by MIR. ]. F. Wooten, of
Munford, Tenn. This recommendation
was made as the result of report
made by Frank King, said to be an
attorney of Memphis, who had been
appointed to make an investigation of
the administration by Harrell of the
estate Of the bankrupt The report
charges that Mr.. Wooten has refused
to turn over gin and electric light
plant that were listed as part of his
assets when the petition was filed. In
addition, this report charges that Mr..
w. V, Bringle, of the local bar, as at
torney for the trustee in bankruptcy,
has been paid a fee by the trustee,
for which he has rendered no SER
vices, and that Mr.. L. e. Gwinn, also
OF the local bar, was paid a fee in
excess of the value of his services in
the cause, and the removal of Mr.
Bringle as attorney for the trustee is
asked, while it is recommended that
Mr.. GWinn be removed and required
to refund a part of the fee allowed
him by w. f. Poston, former referee
in bankruptcy The people of this
county will be slow to believe that Mr.
Wooten has sought to obstruct the
trustee in bankruptcy in performing
his duties, as this report seems to al
lege, and will certainly require some
thing more than the unsupported
statements of Mr. King, a man of
whom our people never before heard,
to convince them that Mr.. Wooten
has not pursued an honorable course
in the matter. There is nothing I'M
the report to Indicate that either
Mr.. Bringle or Mr.. Gwinn has
been paid anything except the
usual fees in cases of this kind
and the coneensus Of opinion among
other members of the local bar is
that an investigation will show that
they have performed their full duty
in this matter and received the usual
and ordinary compensation allowed |
attorneys for such services, and both
of them say that they not only well
come, but demand a full and comp
plete investigation Of these charges. |
Mr. Bringle was away on his vaca-
tion when publication was made in
the Commercial Appeal Of these
charges, but Mr., Gwinn gave to
representative of the Commercial
Appeal an interview, which fully ex-
plains the connection of these at
torneys with the case and which is
as follows:
Il have read the publication in the
Commercial Appeal this morning in
regard to the connection of Mr.. w.
". Bringle and myself with the ], F.
Wooten bankruptcy proceedings in
the federal court at Memphis, Tenn,
but have not had an opportunity to
examine the report of Mr.. King, upon
which this article seems to be based.
personally, | shall welcome a full
investigation of my connection with
that case, or with any other case in
which have appeared as attorney,
either in the state or federal courts.
Gas to the fee Of $3.50 allowed for
services of myself and other members
of my firm in connection with that
case, | have no desire to engage in
newspaper controversy in regard to Il
or unreasonablen
of the same, as that will be thres.ed
out in court under the petition filed
by the referee. But in view of the
charge of the Investigator and the
given it, | will say that |
do not believe that there is repu-
table lawyer in the State of Tennes-
see who, when informed of all the
facts, will testify that $3.50 was any,
thing but reasonable and proper
charge for the services for which it
was allowed, and | have not the re-
hottest idea that any court, after full
will order a refund Of
any part of this fee | realize that
the amount Of compensation that
should be allowed an attorney for his
is always a matter of opin-
ion about which men may honestly
differ, but when Mr.. King intimates
that | have advised the bankrupt to
ambarrass or hinder the trustee in
the performance of any of his duties I
In regard to the gin and electric ma
,hinery or otherwise, and for that
reason seeks a recovery Of part of
the fee, he makes a statement that is
without the slightest foundation in 8
'act, and one that viii not be sup
ported by scintilla of evidence on
he hearing. e
"Mr. King evidently made a very S
superficial investigation of the con- t
iection of Mr.. Bringle and myself e
With this. case. Mr.. Bringle has BEEN i
away on his vacation for several e
weeks, and do not know what effort |
dr. King made to Communicate with $
lin. He made no inquiry of me in a
'egard to any OF the matters set out $
Il his report, and had he made an in 0
uiry of Mr.. Bringle or n4yself, he
would have learned that Mr.. Bringle,
n attorney for the trustee, has filed v
bill in the ehancery court at Cow e
ngton, Tenn, seeking to set aside a q
Of real estate made by the e
about year before the fill 2
ag Of his petition and alleged in the e
frarAir,,a5 an popa E;ubtA