Review of an order of the referee allowing attorneys for the trustee the sum of $25,000 for services, upon petition of the Maryland Casualty Company, a corporation, creditor.

The firm of Devlin & Devlin, consisting of Robert T. Devlin, William H. Devlin, and Arthur S. Devlin, wore, on March 16, 1927, employed and appointed attorneys for the trastee, and said attorneys still are acting in such capacity. Said attorneys petitioned the court for allowance of fees in the sum of $55,000, apportioned as follows: $2,750 for services in connection with the administration of the estate; 40 per cent, of $125,000, the sum recovered in what is known as equity suit No. 263 for extraordinary services; $2,250 for services in equity suit No. 267. After hearing, the referee allowed the sum of $25,000 on account.

It is objected that the fee is excessive, and that George R. Freeman, one of the attorneys employed by Devlin & Devlin, “has fraudulently concealed from the trustee herein and from the Bankruptcy Court the receipt of largo sums of money which should be credited on the claim presented herein by the estate of Frank R. Freeman, deceased, represented by said George R. Freeman as executor.”

The Freeman claim is for $59,700, to which objections wore filed by the Maryland Casualty Company, a hearing was had before the referee, and decision is pending. This claim, its allowance or rejection, is in no way involved in the matter of the fee allowed to attorneys for the trustee. It is true that in the petition for fees Devlin & Devlin also asked for “fees and compensation” for George R. Freeman and Horace B. Whiff, “attorneys associated with said firm.” But the referee made it quite plain during the hearing that he understood the situation when he said, “I am allowing only one fee for the attorneys for the trustee, and I can recognize only the attorney for the trustee.” Devlin & Devlin were and are the attorneys for the trustee, and to them only could a fee be allowed. Any expense incurred by Devlin & Devlin for legal assistance in the premises is not a charge against the bankrupt’s estate, and this court is not concerned as to arrangements Devlin & Devlin may have made for the payment for such legal assistance.

In allowing the fee, the referee disregarded the application of the attorneys for compensation for specific services, and made an allowance of 20 per cent, of $125,000, the amount actually recovered for the bankrupt’s estate, and without which there would have been an estate to administer of the appraised value of only $664.88. The referee gives the following reasons for making the allowance:

*149 In determining reasonable compensation in a case such as this, there is to be considered the character, ability, and experience of the attorneys, the amount involved, the time consumed in dealing with matters of the estate, the difficulty and intricacy of legal propositions to be determined, the skill employed, the responsibility and risk of the attorneys'where, as here, costs and expenses of litigation were advanced, and especially the results attained. The results attained here show that the attorneys for the trustee were not only able and skillful, but met every requirement necessary for the successful conduct of the legal matters appertaining to the bankruptcy estate. As observed by Judge Woolsey in Re Osofsky et al. (D. C.) 50 F.(2d) 925, 927 , “when the efforts of attorneys cause a material increase in the bankruptcy estate, or, as here, create it, they should be well rewarded.”

The order of the referee allowing compensation will be modified by making the payment of one fee of $25,000 on account to Devlin & Devlin, instead of to Devlin & Devlin, George R. Freeman, and Horace B. Wulff, and, with such modification, it will be confirmed.