Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar

Summary

Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar United States v. Waters — Opinion of the Court

If the attorney general has the right, upon information derived from a statement made to him by a district attorney as to the facts and circumstances of a trial in court, to reduce a fee allowed by the court, he may with equal right and propriety increase such fee, should he determine that the judge had underestimated the importance and difficulty of the cause tried before him, and had undervalued the services of such district attorney.
Source: Wikisource

Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar United States v. Waters — Opinion of the Court

The discretionary fee that 'may be allowed' to a district attorney for securing a conviction in a case of indictment for a crime tried by a jury is none the less an incident to the trial and judgment because its allowance is contingent upon a conviction. Both before and since the enactment of the statute of 1853, courts, in the exercise of their discretion, have allowed counsel fees in many cases without question when reviewed by this court.
Source: Wikisource

Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar United States v. Waters — Opinion of the Court

The contention of the United States is that this discretionary power is vested in the attorney general, and that the fixing of the amount of a special counsel fee, in the absence of express legislative provision, is not a judicial but an executive act, to be exercised by the attorney general, as chief of the department to which district attorneys belong.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature