Paul G. Spinks & Mary E. Spinks v. J. L. Jones, Sr. & J. L. Jones, Jr. D/B/A J. L. Jones Constr. Co. v. United States of Am., Intervenor-Appellant. No. 74-1373. Summary Calendar. Rule 18, 5th Cir. See Isbell Enter., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. Of New York, 431 F.2d 409, Part, 499 F.2d 339 (5th Cir. 1974). · Go Syfert
Search
Paul G. Spinks & Mary E. Spinks v. J. L. Jones, Sr. & J. L. Jones, Jr. D/B/A J. L. Jones Constr. Co. v. United States of Am., Intervenor-Appellant. No. 74-1373. Summary Calendar. Rule 18, 5th Cir. See Isbell Enter., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. Of New York, 431 F.2d 409, Part, 499 F.2d 339 (5th Cir. 1974). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“the stakeholder of an interpleaded fund is not entitled to attorney's fees to the extent that they are payable out of a part of the fund impressed with a federal tax lien.”
27 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 18 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Pineda REO LLC v. AECOM Hunt (txnd, 2020-03-12)
Treatment trajectory · 1974 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1974 2000 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Pineda REO LLC v. AECOM Hunt
N.D. Tex. · 2020 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
the stakeholder of an interpleaded fund is not entitled to attorney's fees to the extent that they are payable out of a part of the fund impressed with a federal tax lien.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Charles Schwab & Co. v. Makowska (2×) also: Cited "see"
E.D.N.Y · 2014 · confidence medium
Moreover, “[t]he stakeholder of an inter-pleaded fund is not entitled to attorney’s fees to the extent that they are payable out of a part of the fund impressed with a federal tax lien.” Spinks v. Jones, 499 F.2d 339, 340 (5th Cir.1974) (citations omitted); see also United States v. State Nat’l Bank, 421 F.2d 519 , 521 (2d Cir.1970) (“holding] that a disinterested bank-stakeholder is not entitled to attorney’s fees from a fund when the total amount in the fund is insufficient to satisfy prior federal tax liens”).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) SOUTH ADAMS SAVINGS BANK v. Martel (2×) also: Cited "see"
D. Mass. · 2008 · confidence medium
See, e.g., United States v. Chapman, 281 F.2d 862, 870 (10th Cir.1960); Spinks v. Jones, 499 F.2d 339, 340 (5th Cir.1974); United States v. State Nat’l Bank, 421 F.2d 519 , 521 (2d Cir.1970). 2 Most critically, the IRS cites United States v. Liverpool & London & Globe Ins.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) ABN AMRO v. Miller, et al.
D.N.H. · 2004 · confidence medium
Jones, 499 F.2d 339, 340 (5th Cir. 1974) (“The stakeholder of an interpleaded fund is not entitled to attorney’s fees to the extent that they are payable out of a part of the fund impressed with a federal tax lien. . . .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Fandre v. District Director, Dallas District, Internal Revenue Service (In Re Fandre)
Bankr. E.D. Tex. · 1994 · confidence medium
The Fifth Circuit has already held in Spinks v. Jones, 499 F.2d 339, 340 (1974) that “[t]he stakeholder of an interpleaded fund is not entitled to attorney’s fees to the extent that they are payable out of a part of the fund impressed with a federal tax lien.” Simply put, this option is unavailable to FCB.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Central Bank of Tampa v. United States
M.D. Fla. · 1993 · confidence medium
Cable Atlanta, Inc. v. Project, Inc., 749 F.2d 626, 627 (11th Cir.1984), citing Spinks v. Jones, 499 F.2d 339, 340 (5th Cir.1974).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Cable Atlanta, Inc. v. Project, Inc., Tpics, Inc., Ernest Dixon D/B/A Tpi Construction Supplies, United States of America
11th Cir. · 1984 · confidence medium
Decided in 1974, the Court in Spinks v. Jones, 499 F.2d 339, 340 (5th Cir.1974), citing a string of authorities, said that: [t]he stakeholder of an interpleaded fund is not entitled to attorney’s fees to the extent that they are payable out of a part of the fund impressed with a federal tax lien.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Abex Corporation v. Ski's Enterprises, Inc. And United States of America v. Walton Shim and Sandra Shim
9th Cir. · 1984 · confidence medium
Bank of America National Trust & Savings Assn. v. Mamakos, 509 F.2d 1217, 1219-20 (9th Cir.1975); Campagna-Turano Bakery, Inc. v. United States, 632 F.2d 39, 41 (7th Cir.1980); Spinks v. Jones, 499 F.2d 339, 340 (5th Cir.1974); see also United States v. R.F.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Cable Atlanta, Inc. v. Project, Inc.
N.D. Ga. · 1983 · confidence medium
Spinks v. Jones, 499 F.2d 339, 340 (5th Cir.1974).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Brose v. International Fidelity Insurance
E.D. Pa. · 1982 · confidence medium
Recognizing that any award of fees which it may recover from the interpleader fund cannot prejudice the government’s asserted tax lien, Campagna-Turano Bakery, Inc. v. United States, 632 F.2d 39, 41 (7th Cir. 1980); Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass’n. v. Mamakos, 509 F.2d 1217, 1219 (9th Cir. 1975); Spinks v. Jones, 499 F.2d 339, 340 (5th Cir. 1974), IFIC moves for an order awarding it fees in excess of $7,600.00 upon the condition that plaintiffs, and not the IRS, ultimately prevail.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Paul G. Spinks and Mary E. Spinks
v.
J. L. Jones, Sr. And J. L. Jones, Jr. D/B/A J. L. Jones Construction Company v. United States of America, Intervenor-Appellant. No. 74-1373. Summary Calendar. Rule 18, 5th Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 431 F.2d 409, Part
339.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Aug 23, 1974.
499 F.2d 339
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

499 F.2d 339

74-2 USTC P 9657

Paul G. SPINKS and Mary E. Spinks, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
J. L. JONES, Sr. and J. L. Jones, Jr. d/b/a J. L. Jones
Construction Company, et al., Defendants, v.
UNITED STATES of America, Intervenor-Appellant.
No. 74-1373. Summary Calendar.*
*Rule 18, 5th Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Inc.
v.
Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 431 F.2d 409, Part

I (5th Cir. 1970).

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Aug. 23, 1974.

Edward J. Vulevich, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Mobile, Ala., Scott P. Crampton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Meyer Rothwacks, Chief, Daniel F. Ross, Jonathan S. Cohen, Attys., Tax Div. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for intervenor-appellant.

L. Y. Sadler, Jr., Camden, Ala., for other interested parties.

Alvin T. Prestwood, Montgomery, Ala., for plaintiffs-appellees.

Before COLEMAN, DYER and RONEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

The sole question on this appeal is the propriety of the District Court's award of attorney's fees to the stakeholders of an interpleaded fund partially impressed with federal tax liens. The award reduced the Government's recovery pro tanto. We vacate and remand.

2

J. L. Jones Construction Company recovered a judgment against Paul and Mary Spinks in an Alabama court. Faced with conflicting claims against the moneys represented by the state judgment, including federal tax liens, the Spinkses brought an interpleader action. The District Court determined the priority of each claim and ordered distribution of the fund: first, $3,700 to the Construction Company's attorney, employed on a contingent retainer, for his services in creating the fund; second, $500 to the Spinkses as reasonable attorney's fees for bringing the interpleader action; third, $2,070.74 in full payment to Marshall Lumber & Mill Company on its mechanic's lien; and fourth, the balance of the $11,100 fund to the United States in partial satisfaction of its tax liens. The Government appealed the $500 reduction in the amount otherwise available to it caused by the award of attorney's fees to the Spinkses.

3

The stakeholder of an interpleaded fund is not entitled to attorney's fees to the extent that they are payable out of a part of the fund impressed with a federal tax lien. Commercial Standard Insurance Co. v. Campbell, 254 F.2d 432, 433 (5th Cir. 1958); see United States v. R. F. Ball Construction Co., 355 U.S. 587, 78 S.Ct. 442, 2 L.Ed.2d 510 (1958); United States v. Hubbell, 323 F.2d 197 (5th Cir. 1963); United States v. State National Bank, 421 F.2d 519 (2d Cir. 1970); United States v. Wilson, 333 F.2d 147 (3d Cir. 1964). See generally J. Moore, Federal Practice P22.16(2), at 3159-3162 (1974); C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure: Civil 1719, at 488-489 (1972). The Spinkses stress that here, unlike the above cases, the Government does not have the paramount claim. This distinction finds no support in the decided cases. The judicial prerogative to award stakeholders their attorney's fees must give way to the supremacy of the federal tax lien law whenever an award would invade the amount subject to tax lien. United States v. Chapman, 281 F.2d 862, 870 (10th Cir. 1960). In this case, the District Court's fee award 'off the top' invaded the tax lien by reducing the amount which would therein be recoverable by the Government. The portion of an interpleaded fund that is subject to a Government tax lien cannot be reduced by an award of attorney's fees to the stakeholder for bringing the interpleader action.

4

We therefore vacate the judgment insofar as it decreases the sum otherwise available to the United States for satisfaction of its tax lien by the $500 attorney's fees to the Spinkses and remand this cause to the District Court for further consideration in the light of this opinion.

5

Vacated and remanded.