Evening Republican, Volume 17, Number 163, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 10 July 1913 — ABOUT $10,000 FEE ALLOWED ATTORNEYS [ARTICLE]

ABOUT $10,000 FEE ALLOWED ATTORNEYS

More Correct Statement Which Does Mot Excuse the Allowance of Excessive Amount. a , r Since the publication in The Evening Republican of Wednesday concerning the large attorney fee allowed to George A. Williams and Frank Foltz one or. two inaccuracies In the article have been pointed out and correction is cheerfully made, but these Inaccuracies do not materially change the effect and in no manner justify the fee, wbich not only the land owners but other attorneys agree is excessive. . The original article stated that the law provides that the maximum sum that can be allowed In cases of this kind is 4 per cent of the estimated cost. The fact is that the law is a little more liberal and provides that the maximum charge can be 4 per cent of the estimated benefits, which must exceed the estimated cost or ditches can hot be built. In this Ryan ditch case the estimated benefits were $359,886.12, and 4 per cent of. this amount would have been $14,375.44, and Special Judge Cunningham could have allowed this amount. / He was not asked to do so by the attorneys for the petitioners, however, who suggested that the practice here was to allow 4 per cent of the estimated cost and that this would be SIO,OOO, and that was the sum allowed.

The estimated cost as the ditch now stands after the Reed lateral estimate is withdrawn is $258,849, and 4 per cent of this amount would have been $10,353.96, or $353.96 more than was allowed. It is not probable that the attorneys will ask to have the case- reopened, however, for the purpose of trying to have this added to their fee. A second mistake was the statement that the ditch had been tin the courts only about a year. The -ecord shows that the original petition was filed Sept. 16, 1909, which is almost four years ago. The case was partially tried before Judge Hanley once before and errors discovered in the specifications that caused a halt in the proceedings, and provisions for another route for part of the ditch. The ease as tried in the special session of the court under the jurisdiction of Special Judge Cunningham has occupied some five or six weeks’ time, with intermissions which extended it over a somewhat longer period. That, of course, is not all the time nor all the labor that the attorneys have put Into the case. But that constitutes at least half of the actual labor, the balance being devoted to preparation of the petitions and conferences with petitioners. No attorney Un Rensselaer that we have met has suggested that there Is any particular legal talent required to carry a d/itch petition through after it Is filed.

The special judge who tried this case received $5 per day for his services, which recalls a story of an allowance made to an .attorney in another county recently. The judge said: ‘lt is not my intention to disallow this claim nor to reduce it, but it 4s a mighty high fee and I desre to ask a comparison of this fee with the meager salary which the court trying the ease received.” The Republican finds that there is objection of a most pronounced kind among the farmers who are to pay for this ditch because of this big fee and has failed to find any person wfho does not consider it very excessive and entirely out of reason for the service rendered. The Marble ditch was mentioned in a previous article. A. Halleck, of Rensselaer, and Attorney Potter, of Lafayette, were allowed $7,500 as a “partial allowance” for that ditch., This was made by Special Judge Marvin in October, 1911. The estimated benefits from the construction of this ditch total $426,908.44, while the estimated cost is $328,391.11. On the basis of 4 per cent of the cost the attorneys’ fee will total $13,135.64. The ditch is now in the supreme court and it is quite probal!W that Judge Marvin expects to allow the balance of that amount before the ditch Is completed In the Borntrager ditch case the estimated cost was SIOO 000 and Attorney Williams was allowed $2,000, or 2 per cent of this estimate as a partial allowance Presumably Judge Hanan intends to allow the balance and keep up the 4 per cent plan. This would be a more reasonable fee, however, than the one at lowed In the Ryan ditch case, as -there was much more work involved in the Borntrager ditch than in the Ryan ditch, notwithstanding the fact that the Ryan ditch will cost two and one-half times as much to construct. It is said to be the policy of the commissioners’ courts of the state to allow 4 per cent on small ditches and this is probably not excessive. Attorney Roy Blue, who is employed in George A. Williams’ office, prepared for The Republican a statement of facts which are employed in the preparation of this article. In a brief statement of these facts he says: "It is a rule of the circuit court to allow 4 per cent of the estimated cost rather than 4 per cent of the estimated benefits.” In an Interview Mr. Blue said that Judge Hanley had established this

as a rule of his court. We do not believe, however, that there is an incident of his having allowed a fee of this enormity on that basis and he is quoted as having said that a fee of $5,000 for this work would have been entirely adequate. Another attorney said that he regarded an allowance of SI,OOO as sufficient. Judge Hanley is out of the city today and could not be interviewed as to any precedent for an unvarying allowance of 4 per cent of the estimated cost, and even if he had there was nothing in that fact to justify a special attorney for doing the same thing in a case involving so great cost. One attorney who said that 'the was perfectly willing to be quoted, but whose name is not used because The Republican does not care to start any quarrel among members of the bar, stated that he proposed to do what he could toward stopping payment of any portion of the money at this time. Judge Cunningham’s order was that the attorneys receive $7,500 now and the balance at a later time. This attorney further said that the effect of allowing such exorbitant fees would be to have legislative action restricting the fee or doing away with it entirely. He also pointed out the fact that when the upper Iroquois ditch was ordered there was no at torney fee at all as there was no law permitting it at that time. * He made a further comparison, showing that the total reductions secured by remonatrators to the Ryan assessments was $15,000 and that this was practically all retaxed by the SIO,OOO attorney fee and the costs of making the fight, all of which is taxed up against the ditch. The effect should thorough understanding in the future as to what fees should be allowed or there should be an open date set when the allowance is going to be made and permit those who have it to pay to offer some evidence as to the value of the sendees.