From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Birrell v. Great Lakes Utilities Corporation

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
May 6, 1938
96 F.2d 767 (3d Cir. 1938)

Opinion

Nos. 6560, 6561.

May 6, 1938.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Delaware; John P. Nields, Judge.

Proceedings on the petitions of Lowell M. Birrell and another, attorneys for William L. Adams and others, as First Lien Bondholders' Committee for Great Lakes Utilities Corporation and of the committee for compensation for aid in effectuating a plan of corporate reorganization. The petitions were denied and Lowell M. Birrell and the committee appeal.

Appeals dismissed.

Lowell M. Birrell, of New York City (Robert H. Snyder, of New York City, of counsel), for appellants.

Hugh M. Morris and Edwin D. Steel, Jr., both of Wilmington, Del., for appellees.

Before BUFFINGTON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and WATSON, District Judge.


Assuming for present purposes the power of a court sitting in 77B reorganization proceedings, (Bankr.Act, 11 U.S.C.A. § 207) to allow compensation to those who, apart from their own duty, have really and substantially aided such court in effectuating such plan, we are of opinion the court below, which was thoroughly conversant with all proceedings, committed no reversible error in its declining to grant payments to the appellants. In that regard its conclusions were thus stated:

"The petition of the committee for holders of Great Lakes Utilities Corporation First Lien Collateral Trust Gold 5½% bonds, and the petition of Lowell M. Birrell and Reuben Satterthwaite, Jr., attorneys for said committee, must be denied. This committee and its attorneys served the interest of the bondholders only and they should be compensated by them. Repeatedly throughout the testimony it was stated that the committee and its attorneys were interested only in the bondholders of the debtor. Their efforts were not in the interest of all security holders who must be served by a plan of reorganization. They opposed all plans that did not accord bondholders greater security."

After full consideration had, we are of opinion that the appeals of the appellants should be dismissed, and it is so ordered.


Summaries of

Birrell v. Great Lakes Utilities Corporation

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
May 6, 1938
96 F.2d 767 (3d Cir. 1938)
Case details for

Birrell v. Great Lakes Utilities Corporation

Case Details

Full title:BIRRELL v. GREAT LAKES UTILITIES CORPORATION et al. ADAMS et al. v. GREAT…

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: May 6, 1938

Citations

96 F.2d 767 (3d Cir. 1938)

Citing Cases

Steere v. Baldwin Locomotive Works

In re Paramount Publix Corporation, 2 Cir., 83 F.2d 406; In re Consolidated Motor Parts, 2 Cir., 85 F.2d 579;…