Priest v. Wells
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
MUNGER, District Judge.
This is an appeal presented upon an agreed statements of facts, pursuant to equity rule 77 (198 Eed. xli, 115 C. C. A. xli). The question involved is the right of the appellant to an allowance for his services as an attorney from the funds in the hands of the receiver. The allowance was denied by the trial court. Appellant was employed by the corporation as general counsel for the street railway system known as the United Railways Company of St. Louis (hereafter called railway company or company), for a period of one year from March 1, 1919, at a salary of $18,000 per…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bosworth v. St. Louis Terminal Railroad Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Adler v. SeamanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1920
- Burden Central Sugar-Refining Co. v. Ferris Sugar-Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1898
- Dodwell v. ReevesMississippi Supreme Court · 1917
3Cited by1 opinion
- Mitchell v. WhitmanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938