Henderson v. Avondale Marine Ways, Inc., 205 F.2d 518 (5th Cir. 1953). · Go Syfert
Search
Henderson v. Avondale Marine Ways, Inc., 205 F.2d 518 (5th Cir. 1953). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Estate of Smith (calctapp, 1981-03-30)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Estate of Smith
Cal. Ct. App. · 1981 · signal: see · confidence high
(Estate of Ferrall (1953) 41 Cal.2d 166, 176 [ 258 P.2d 1009 ]; see United States v. Smither, supra, 205 F.2d at p. 519 ; Funk v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (3d Cir. 1950) 185 F.2d 127, 129 ; Rest.2d Trusts, § 187, com. j.) In the case at bench we are told that one provision of the decree of distribution and the will that created the trust gave the trustee a power of appointment with respect to the trust corpus of $5,000 or 5 percent annually, noncumulative.
cited Cited "see" United States v. Texas Construction Company
5th Cir. · 1955 · signal: see · confidence high
See Henderson v. Avondale Marine Ways, 5 Cir., 205 F. 2d 518 .
cited Cited "see" United States ex rel. Caldwell Foundry & Machine Co. v. Texas Construction Co.
5th Cir. · 1955 · signal: see · confidence high
See Henderson v. Avondale Marine Ways, 5 Cir., 205 F.2d 518 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
HENDERSON Et Al.
v.
AVONDALE MARINE WAYS, Inc.
14327_1.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Jun 26, 1953.
205 F.2d 518
Frederick J. Gisevius, Jr., and Robert R. Gisevius, New Orleans, La., for appellants., Leon Sarpy, New Orleans, La., Chaffe, McCall, Toler & Phillips and Edmund Mc-Ilhenny, New Orleans, La., Mendes & Mount, New York City, of counsel, for ap-pellee.
Holmes, Strum, Rives.
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published
RIVES, Circuit Judge.

Upon consideration, the petitidrt of ap-pellee for rehearing in the above styled and numbered cause is hereby denied.

This Court has heretofore allowed attorney’s fees directly on motion filed by the attorney for the claimant and in accordance with 33 U.S.C.A. § 928. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Henderson, 5 Cir., 128 F.2d 1019; Radcliff Gravel Co. v. Henderson, 5 Cir., 138 F.2d 549. In eSich of those cases, however, the judgment of the District Court was affirmed; while in the present case, the judgment is i-eversed and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion of this Court. Such further proceedings, we think, should include the allowance of such claims for legal sexwices rendered before the Deputy Commissioner and in the Distinct Court and on appeal as may appear just and proper in accordance with the provisions of 33 U.S. C.A. § 928. Accordingly, the motion for this Court to fix attorney’s fees is denied.

Denied.