110
FEDERAL REPOR:rER.
vol. 45.
BIRD t1. UNITED STATES. (District Court, D. Maine. January 22, 1891.) j.. DISTRIOT ATTORNEy-FEES.
'Counsel fees allowed to a United States district attorney by the court cannot be reduced by the attorney general. . . A district attorney is not entitled to fees' for obtaining warrants for the removal of prisoners arrested in oire district and triable in another.. " . ,
S. S.
SAME.
But be is entitled to a per dilem for attendance before a commissioner to examine poor convicts applying for aischarge, and for attendance before a commissioner on days whep recognizances are taken, though no witnesses are examined.
At Law.
George E. Bird, pro Isaac W. Dyer, U. S. Atty.
,:WEBB, J. ,This is a suit for the amount of sundry fees for official services as United States attorney. 1 and 2. The judge who presided at various trials onindictments which resulteliin verdicts of conviction allowed certain counsel fees to the petitioner under section 824 of the Revised Statutes. The attorney general cut off from the counsel fees approved by the court in all $80. This item is for preparing and presenting papers to procure warrants for the removal from'this district to the district where they were tdable ofaccuaed persons found and arrested here. For these services hi each casettn allowancEJor $1 Ois'demanded. fee forea<¥ of days for attendance before United CW,rlpliS1lionersin oa&es of persons charged with violations of law, .t $5 ,peboay" $35, disallowed by the accounting officers Upon the theory thntbusinei;s',thmsactedbeforethecommissioners on days when no witJiesseif were, examined does not warrant the charge of a per diem fee. i' 5.' 'A:ttEmdai'we an 33 :t\eparate days bE!fore commissioners, to examine section 10,,42 of the, Rev.ised Stll.tutB$.· ,This item was the hearing by striking o.ut from, the, :petition the'chatges of April-6,1888, for examination of Vead 28th, 111 ,the case of Mary C. Purcell; and that of May 2'9lb'; 'lricttsedrSarahT.Comier, leavirip;charges in 30 cllses, at $5 per dBydmeacb; $150. .'I.'hesecharges wereidisallowed, because it was held laccot[btingofficers. that no feelS provided for such services.: ,rA); The. petition wasd'u.rthet ilmendedby striking (jilt the whole of @s:1tem, consisting of'attol'bey,'sfees Qt $1:0:1n U. S.; Pltf.., v. HannahF. .lfre6man. and of 85 in' Sil/ln.e'V. Albion.,Drake et ala..· . f
I
,..
·
'if,.! .,
I'"
"
L '.
FACTS :F<?P.ND.
I find thll.t perfo:rmedall.the services specified iu this; petitian; that the disallowances stated were: made by the accounting officers upon examination!.ifif his aCcQunts,forwarded 'afteDduepresentation,
MITCHELL &. RAMMELSnURG FtJRNITtrRlll
dO.
V. SAMPSON.
'111
verifiCation, and'4pproval in open court; that counsel fees' were allowed by the court, and were reducedjas set forth; that in the cases before commissioners, on the days for which per diim fees were disallowed no witnesses were examined, but, prisoners were brought in by the marshal, the officer's reJ;nrns upon the precepts were examined;' the prisoners were arraigned and plel,lded; sometimes upon the motion of the government, and sometimes on that of the respondent, supported by reasons found by the commissionersufficienti the hearing' was adjourned to a later day, and the party recognized or was committed for appearance at the appointed time. In no instance was such Mjournment,had with any purpose of increasing fees or multiplying days' attendance. OF' LA.vi. The fees rel?ides in the;point, made are npt subject ,to reduction by any pther Qffiic6f" , U. S. V. W(1ters l ,133U. S. ,208, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 219. "services" war· . removal of p'iisoners from ,this dilltrict,. nothing cap .. If par-tof the attorn,ey's dpty.,witlwut special fi,mnth6 rif justice:.w ;to this, ness,. it be regl;Lrded tlS "enjoined. ,by; l.aw of ,his p:fficei: for which he must ae gi'!'esj:lim,;'! oJ1tj the i,spaid of :8iftnton,v. u. S.· fees for ;the 4Q1YSi ·and .hea.ripg was continued. are, pfoperlYJ9parg\l<l, and,;thft :pe; titi9neds et:\titled ,to pliynient,of the tlW sioninrespect to the forexamiuatiRn ',of qony,kttj for, . p; .{1YiU8, V. S. ;483 J 10, Stanton v. O. S., 37,Fed. . ' : :.: ' . , . ". {9r ;.·\ ,'I' ,:;', il
Mr.r6tELL
&;
RAMYEisBURG FURNITURE
Co. v.
SAMPSON. 1'.1[:·/',.
,Cr;nLrt, N ·.D. ,Floridq,.., .Febl"lla,rr 16" J:891.}
l'DJ)GMBNT-RiwIVAL-PARTNJiitSlffi.-CITA,TION.. !.'
Civil Cadeta. art; 8M7, providing for reviving a jUdgment, prescribes' ttiat I1i be dOlle, by having a oitation. issued "to the. defendant or . · * and,if,lIuoh defendant be not CQurtWlllY !loP': point a IYIl-ratorad Me to !-'epresent ):lim in. .1i4e upon whioh ad hoc the· citation shaUbe' served.» He'ttt tllat . rendered '.agaU1!it >1' partnersbl.p and 1ihe memben.individuallY,· I'll BolWo; cannot-be·revived Ii member who has since the. oitation is to; and the appomtDien1i; euraW/" ali /We tor, the .partnership only. " " -.' , ) ." . . . . 't
.
.."....., ..'
AtIJRw. j , ,Civil l art. 3547" provides! that' "all jridginents' for ,m'OMy ! '*.·.· *,.'shaH:be.pr.esoribed, ten years