Show compensation FIXED I 1 on mar 2 the territorial territory Terri tori al supreme court rendered a decision fixing the compensation of Ilece receiver iver dyer and his attorneys williams and peters it is as follows the united states vs the late corporation of the church of jesus christ of latter day saints opinion by judd justice sufficient appears in this case to show that in march 1887 the congress of or the united states passed an act the section of which is as follows that the acts of the legislative assembly of tho the territory of utah incorporating cor rating co continuing nung ortro or providing for the co corporation ration known as the church of jesus christ of lat berday saints and the ordinances of the so called general assembly of the state of deseret incorporating the church of jesus christ of latter day saints so far as the same may now have legal force and validity are hereby disapproved and annulled and the said corporation in so far as it may now have or pretend to have any legal existence is hereby dissolved that it shall be the duty of the attorney general of the united states to cause such proceedings to be taken in the supreme court of the territory of utah as shall be proper to execute the foregoing provisions of this section and to wind L up p the affairs of said corporation conformably to law and in such proceedings the court shall have power and it shall be its duty to make such decree or decrees as shall be proper to effectuate the transfer of the title to r real eal property now held and used by said cor corporation for places of worship and parsonages personages nages connected therewith and burial grounds and of the description mentioned in the proviso to section 13 of this act and in in section 26 of this act to the respective trustees mentioned in section 26 of this act and for the purposes of this section said court shall have all the powers of a court of equity in pursuance ursu ance of the duty imposed by saad said section the attorney gen era eral of the united states caused a bill to be filed in this court on the day of july 1887 and upon the fitingof filin filing of the bill such proceedings were had as resulted november ath 1887 in the following decree this day this cause came on further to be heard and for the appointment of a receiver herein conformably to the former order of this court and thereupon the court being fully advised in the premises hereby orders and adjudges that frank H dyer esquire of salt lake in the said territory of utah be and he hereby is is a appointed anted receiver of the defendant t the e late incorporation of the church of jes jesus us christ of latter day saints and all of its debts and property real personal and mixed of every nature kind and description whatsoever including any and all equitable interests which it may have to any ther thereof eoV the receiver dyer in due time executed his bond in the sum of and set about possessing 0 15 himself of the property both real and personal of the defunct corporation when the receiver had been in office office for about one year he came into this court and asked for and procured an order making a special reference to E T sprague as master in chancery to examine and pass upon the receipts and expenditures ili of the said receiver and to take proof and report what would be a re rea donable atonable allowance to him and his two attorneys P L williams and george S peters for their respective services done and performed in behalf of such receivership in pursuance of this order such proceedings were had before the waster master sprague as resulted in the taking of a large amount of proof upon which he made his report to this thia court fixing the compensation of the receiver at the sum of and that of each of his attorneys at ae the master also reported in favor of allowing to the receiver after passing upon his accounts his expenditures pend tures stated to be exceptions to this report were filed by the complainant the united states and upon such report and exceptions the cause on a former day of this court was elaborately and ably argued by counsel for both sides and we come now after the fullest consideration we have been able to give to the cause to announce afe the result of our conclusions the report of the receiver filed with us and which is appended to this opinion as a P part A of the same shows that prior to october 1888 there had come to his hands of the derelict assets of the defunct dafun ct corporation real estate situated in the city ok of salt lake alake and other places in the territory agar aggregating 1 in value the sum of and an that in like manner there has come into his bis hands monies and various kinds of personal property of the value of making the aggregate sum of alit it regate should a be stated that a small portion artion of this aggregate sum came nis to his hands hando between the day of october last named and the day of january 1889 in this aggregate sum is included accretions of various kinds including rent of sheep not yet due dividends interest rents rente of lands etc etc aggregating the sum of much evidence has haa been taken by the receiver and is here submitted as a part of his report by the master the witnesses who are shown to be business men of great experience and high character when interrogated as to their estimate of the value of the services of the receiver put it some of them at a per cent rent upon the amount of property held by the receiver and others at a lampin g sum they take into their calculations some of them the trouble that the receiver had to acquire possession of the property the amount of bond he W had to 0 give ive and the responsibility altac attached ted to holding and keeping so larke large an amount of property and yet others think that he should be paid for what they termed the odium attaching to his position as receiver meaning by that as it seems that because the congress of the united states has dismantled this corporation and provided for the escheat of the property which it held contrary to law that it was odious it is sufficient of this to say sagy that this court sitting here to administer the laws of the government of the united states will not only not act upon but will not tolerate any such suggestion as the basis of its decision it has been s strongly urged upon us by counsel at the bar that we ought to act upon the opinions of these witnesses and aad fix the compensation of the receiver at the sum of we do not think so the facts upon which those gentlemen base their opinions are in the record and are as fully before us as they were before them and after a thorough examination of the cases upon tipon this subject no ease case has been found in which the court contented itself with blindly following the opinions of witnesses in fixing the compensation of the receiver one of the best considered cases to which our attention has been called is the case of central trust co agal against not wabash st louis railway co 00 fed rep bep at page in speaking of this matter of if fixing the compensation of receiver the court uses this language they are all witnesses whose opinions axe are entitled to the highest respect ott on account of their character their abilities and their experience and y yet et the very differences that exia exi between ahem show that there is DO n fixed standard or rule to gover governor governa nu and that we must fall back at last upon our own judgment of what under the circumstances would be ft fair and reasonable compensation for the services this language is well adapted to the case in hand the witnesses w an I 1 this case variously estimate the services of the receiver running from the sum of to or rife u upwards S we conceive the true rule of law to be in all cases that the court shall look to all the circumstances of the case such as the tb amount of property to be handled kept and cared for the difficulty or ease with which the receiver receive r got the tb same in hand the kind and character of the property the amount of bond required the business character an aal I 1 integrity required for the work and finally the manner itt which the trust has been executed and then say what would be a A fair and reasonable allo allowance walice keeping in mind that the laborer is worthy of his hire and that extravagance is to be avoided testing the ORO case by the rule announced we have no difficulty in coming to a conclusion that is entirely satisfactory more than one third of til th property is real estate which require but little trouble to carector care car etor for most of the cash on hand as well as the other personal property was waa acquired with but little litigation indeed we may say without any affy the sheep were at 0 once nee leased out by contracts that fu fully ily acquit to receiver of any responsibility or 0 trouble during their existence and compel the lessees lessels to return a like 1 number of sheep the money in the banks and the dividends upon the stocks are easily collected colleen the active duties of the recel received receive verp 1 with reference to his trust for tho most part ceased at the entering of 0 the final decree since which tana he be has been but little else than S stakeholder stake holder we think the proper way to fix compensation in this cap hafl is not by a per cent but I 1 by a and we have de determined to alj 5 for one year dating from time of his appointment we think that I 1 40 that hat year is a fair and rM allowance under the ue laid down in this opinion with th this we are entirely content we e do not intend by this to be bound w 49 to what allowance we will make for services performed after this tame ne covered by this allowance but in ln future as in this case we will be kvernes Kvern ed by what may seem to us wn under runder all the circumstances w e can say for this receiver that so fa as we can see he has brought to aid a full measure of ability and in the man management arment of his arild st and we have no doubt that his big ettre conduct will prove a voucher the future so far as bompensa of the receivers receive es counsel is concerned arned much of what has been d a applies lies to them the law is ele centary en tary that the fixing of fees between client and attorney in cases of this kind is peculiarly the province of the court so jeal Qs are courts courte of this matter that wen ever in cases where the clients to pay their attorney a a axe amount in writing the court 1 inquire into its reasonableness reasonable dess y r vs planters bank al dwelT dwer tenn in this case the reme preme bourt court of tennessee upon ru shearing U hearing took the responsibility of f cutting off about two thirds of the ue tees fees claimed under a written contract onti act because the claim w was as by the vule court deemed to be unreasonable the facts as to the attorneys ln im this case show that their active waties except to give advice virtu y ceased at the com compromise romise as it Is called in july 1888 and that in the we most difficult part of the litiza on they had the aid of another OM sta of lawyers equal in ability to adv in I 1 n the territory we think thit nat tor for the year beginning with the appointment of the receiver would oud be a fair and reasonable compensation pensa bation tion for the services of mr wil the receiver stated in his that mr williams was big w Irin principal cipal attorney and that he employed loyed mr peters to assist him 1 Is may not be the exact language but amnie the proof substantial shows that wiliams ma was the principal counsel fixing mr peters allowance we do ao not 10 lose be sight of the fact that rauch much it if indeed the principal part of nT his time was given tw to his official dutley as ae district attorney for this territory eni fory his services ceased too at the he entering of the final decree I 1 in n the vw cause LOOM looking to the whole e eab ba we think that is a fair and na reasonable allowance to him ur of course urge this is not intended to over whatever charge he may see per r to make for any services he y have performed for the government as its counsel in original case that will the subject of a settlement gween ien him and the government govern men hu jbf if the government fl finally in ili joeed M ia recovering the prope property nune the hands of the receiver he can be avaid out of the property so trw toy the i case of adams adam vs wood it acta cited to us as an author wh PV S tb oe receiver could not em th mr peters to is not in point fans and others of the kind all onn poll the idea that there was a ca of interests in this case there is noton not only lyno no conflict of interest but the interest of the united states and the receiver were in exact harmony and there was no impropriety m in the receiver employing peters the sums fixed in this opinion namely name lyl 1 to the receiver to mr williams and to mr peters and the disbursement bur of making the aggregate sum of will be paid by the receiver and the same shall be allowed to him as credits upon his accounts as receiver in this cause A decree will be drawn and entered in conformity with this opinion we concur ch J HENDERSON J BoR miAN J |