Gurney, J. Thomas

English

University of Florida Levin College of Law

Florida Law Review Volume 2 Issue 2 Article 12 January 1949 Equity: Unreasonableness of Master's Fee J. Thomas Gurney Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr  Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation J. Thomas Gurney, Equity: Unreasonableness of Master's Fee, 2 Fla. L. Rev. 293 (1949). Available at: https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr/vol2/iss2/12 This Case Comment is brought to you for free and open access by UF Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida Law Review by an authorized editor of UF Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact kaleita@law.ufl.edu. CASE COMMENTSthan Democrats and Republicans was more than a mere procedural defect,in that on its face it violated the substantive requirements of the election.While mere formal irregularities not affecting the result will not in-validate an election, the Court correctly held that the action of the countycommissioners in this case was a denial of a substantive right to independ-ent voters and therefore was sufficiently serious to invalidate the election.JOHN E. STRAUGHNEQUITY: UNREASONABLENESS OF MASTER'S FEEGarlick v. Garlick, 38 So.2d 222 (Fla. 1949)A suit for divorce was instituted by the wife, alleging habitual intem-perance and extreme cruelty. The husband denied her allegation andfiled a cross-bill, praying for divorce and charging extreme cruelty andungovernable temper. The facts were referred to a master; and uponhis findings the court decreed a divorce in favor of the plaintiff, awardingto her the custody of the two children, half of the couple's assets, and $40a week for the support of herself and the children. The defendant wasassessed court costs totaling over $5,000, which included $1,000 formaster's fee, $750 for the court reporter, and over $3,000 for attorneys'fees. The defendant was employed at $50 a week; and after the homewas sold and court costs paid, he was left with total assets of less than$2,000 with which to settle his affairs. Defendant appealed solely onthe question of alimony. HELD, under the circumstances the award ofalimony was exorbitant, as was the allowance of master's fee, reporter'sfee, and attorneys' fees. Decree reversed for review and reduction.The method of determination of the compensation for the services ofmasters in chancery is covered in the majority of states by statute. Theselaws fall into two general categories: those setting up a schedule of feesfor the various functions of the master,1 and those providing for a feegoverned entirely by the discretion of the court from which the referenceto the master was made,2 subject to appeal. Florida has a statute strictly1Ai. CODE, tit. 7, §298 (1940).2AR=i. CODE, tit. 21, §1101 (1939).1Gurney: Equity: Unreasonableness of Master's FeePublished by UF Law Scholarship Repository, 1949UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA LAW REVIEWin the first category; 3 but, like other states with similar provisions, itallows greater awards in the case of necessary extra services. 4 In thefederal district courts the discretionary method is provided for by rule.5In the jurisdictions depending solely upon the discretion of the courtthe factors considered in determining the award are: the amount of workexpended, 6 the time consumed,7 the ability and experience of the master,8the difficulty of the problem,9 the amount of money or value of propertyconcerned, 10 and the degree of responsibility on the master." In schedulestates, such as Florida, these same factors if sufficiently persuasive allowawards for extra service.12 The Florida law is well settled that primaryemphasis will be laid on the degree of difficulty and labor involved.' 3 Notall extra work, however, constitutes grounds for extra service; and, if themaster performs work that is considered useless or unnecessary, thecourt will disregard it in making the fee allowance.14In our court system the position of a master in chancery is a respon-sible one, requiring considerable time and ability; and, in order to insure ahigh standard of astuteness and efficiency in the men holding this office,8FLA. STAT. §62.07 (1941).'Rainey v. Rainey, 38 So.2d 60 (Fla. 1948); Marion Mtg. Co. v. Moorman, 100Fla. 1522, 131 So. 650 (1930).5FED. Ru ts CIv. PROC. 53 (1938)."Stahl v. Stahl, 166 Il. App. 236 (1911); Livingston County v. Dunn, 244 Ky.460, 51 S. W.2d 450 (1932); Claflin v. Celley, 48 Vt. 3 (1875); Eppes v. Eppes, 181Va. 970, 27 S. E.2d 164 (1943).'In re Gilbert, 276 U. S. 6 (1928); Newton v. Consolidated Gas Co. of N. Y., 259U. S. 101 (1922); Herpich v. Williams, 300 Il. S40, 133 N. E. 220 (1921).'Van Kannel Revolving Door Co. v. Ulrich, 297 Fed. 363 (C. C. A. 8th 1924);Brown v. King, 62 Fed. 529 (C. C. A. 5th 1894).'Stahl v. Stahl, 166 Ill. App. 236 (1911); Gottschalk v. Noyes, 225 Ill. 94, 80N. E. 72 (1906); Livingston County v. Dunn, 244 Ky. 460, 51 S. W.2d 450 (1933);Claflin v. Celley, 48 Vt. 3 (1875)."Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Railroad Comnm'n of Cal., 14 F. Supp. 134 (N. D.Cal. 1936); City Bldg. & Loan Ass'n v. Adler, 117 N. J. Eq. 399, 176 At]. 175 (1935)."In re Gilbert, 276 U. . 6 (1928); Newton v. Consolidated Gas Co. of N. Y., 259U. S. 101 (1922); Finance Committee of Pa. v. Warren, 82 Fed. 525 (C. C. A. 7th1897); Whittal v. Murray Furniture Co., 41 F.2d 277 (M. D. Pa. 1930).'See notes 6-11 supr."'Rainey v. Rainey, 38 So.2d 60 (Fla. 1948); Marion Mtg. Co. v. Moorman, 100Fla. 1522, 131 So. 650 (1930)."Marion Mtg. Co. v. Moorman, 100 Fi. 1522, 131 So. 650 (1930); Manowsky v.Stephen, 233 11. 409, 84 N. E. 365 (1908); Gottschalk v. Noyes, 225 Dl. 94, 80 N. E.72 (1906); In re Hemiup, 3 Paige 304 (N. Y. 1832); Special Bank Comn'rs v. Gran-ston Savinga Bank, 12 R. L 497 (1880).2Florida Law Review, Vol. 2, Iss. 2 [1949], Art. 12https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr/vol2/iss2/12

Equity: Unreasonableness of Master\u27s Fee

Gurney, J. Thomas, Jr.

bepress Legal Repository

https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1548&amp;context=flr

Equity: Unreasonableness of Master\u27s Fee

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Florida Levin College of Law

bepress Legal Repository