Legal Opinion
Franklin v. City of New York
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided August 16, 1944No. 229PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SWAN, Circuit Judge.
These appeals challenge the amount of compensation allowed to Charles Franklin for legal services in the receivership proceedings of Interborough Rapid Transit Company and Manhattan Railway Company. By an order entered July 3, 1940 Judge Patterson allowed Mr. Franklin $20,-000 upon a petition dated May 15, 1940 asking for an allowance, under Article Six paragraph (8) (d) of the Unification Plan, of $345,000 for services as general counsel and solicitor of Manhattan Railway Company. Manhattan and Mr. Franklin, have appealed from this order on the ground of the inadequacy of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- American Brake Shoe & Foundry Co. v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1941
- In re Hollis Lumber Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
- Palmer v. WatsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1941
3Cited by3 opinions
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. W. L. Moody & Co., Bankers (Unincorporated)District Court, S.D. Texas · 1974
- American Brake Shoe & Foundry Co. v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1945
- Manhattan Ry. Co. v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945