From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

David v. Bryant

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Feb 6, 1964
328 F.2d 567 (D.C. Cir. 1964)

Opinion

No. 17798.

Argued January 14, 1964.

Decided February 6, 1964.

Mr. King David, Washington, D.C., appellant pro se.

Mr. William B. Bryant, Washington, D.C., appellee pro se.

Before BAZELON, Chief Judge, and BASTIAN and BURGER, Circuit Judges.


This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court confirming a report of the auditor of that court allowing appellant a fee for his services rendered in a receivership proceeding. After the auditor had filed his report recommending allowance to appellant of a fee of $500, appellant filed exceptions and objections to that report, based on the alleged inadequacy of the recommended allowance. The court, however, overruled the exceptions and objections, and directed the receiver to make distribution in accordance with the auditor's report. The receiver did make such disbursement, including a check to appellant for the $500 recommended, which check appellant accepted and cashed.

We have said on several occasions that this court "may not properly set aside a judgment which rests upon findings of fact made by a special master and adopted by the trial court unless at least such findings are clearly erroneous." Dyker Bldg. Co. v. United States, 86 U.S.App. D.C. 297, 299, 182 F.2d 85, 87 (1950).

Rule 53(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, provides that "the word `master' includes a referee, an auditor, and an examiner."

Holding as we do that the findings of the auditor approved by the District Court are not "clearly erroneous" but are, in fact, well supported in the record, it follows that the judgment of the District Court must be and is

Affirmed.


Summaries of

David v. Bryant

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Feb 6, 1964
328 F.2d 567 (D.C. Cir. 1964)
Case details for

David v. Bryant

Case Details

Full title:King DAVID, Appellant, v. William B. BRYANT, Receiver, United House of…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

Date published: Feb 6, 1964

Citations

328 F.2d 567 (D.C. Cir. 1964)

Citing Cases

Rosendorf v. Toomey

The trial court is required to accept the Auditor-Master's findings of fact unless they are clearly…

In re Estate of Elkins

We will not overturn a judgment based on the Auditor's findings unless those findings are clearly erroneous.…