UNITED STATES ET AL.
v.
PRESTON ET AL.

9th Cir. | 1950-03-23
No. 12218
181 F.2d 69 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1950) Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The district court erred in its theory regarding the United States' interest in the allotted land, which affected its conclusions on attorney fees and expenses. The award for expenses was also excessive.


Facts & Procedural History

The district court fixed attorney fees and expenses, impressing a lien on allotted land, based on the theory that the land was free from any interest …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
STEPHENS, Circuit Judge.

STEPHENS, Circuit Judge.

This case, both as to fact and as to law, practically parallels the companion case No. 12,046 this day decided1 which concerns attorney’s fees and expenses owing by Lee Arenas. We fully treated the fundamental issues of this case in the companion case. The district judge in the instant case fixed attorney fees on a percentum value basis of the allotted land unrestricted by any interest of the United States and made an allowancé for expenses. He ordered the land impressed with a lien to secure payment of the attorney’s fees and expenses and ordered the' land sold forthwith 'by a commissioner in discharge of the indebtedness. The lien was ordered impressed and the attorney fee was fixed upon the-theory .that the allotment was entirely free from any interest of the United States. A mere reading of our opinion in the companion case will clearly show that such theory was Wrong and substantially affected the court’s conclusions and judgment and constituted reversible error:

The record shows on its face that whereas $100 was allowed as expenses, only $15 was actually expended. The judgment should be .reduced in accordance, with these facts.

The case is remanded to the district court with instructions to proceed to fix an attorney fee and to secure its payment by-the impressment of a lien on the allotted property all in accord with' our expressions in the Arenas case No. 12,046. Any lien impressed upon the property should be foreclosable only after a reasonable period has elapsed in which payment could be madé1.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

. No. 12,046, Arenas v. Preston, United States v. Preston, 181 F. 2d 62.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw