|
Holliday v. Kline
(In Re Kline), 65
F.3d 749 (8th Cir. 1995)(Chapter 7) (Circuit Judge
Bowman) (before Bowman, Heaney, Morris Arnold)
The Court of
Appeals held that judgment against chapter 7 debtor for former
wife’s attorney fees in divorce action was nondischargeable
maintenance, even though payable directly to attorney.
Agate Holdings,
Inc. v. Ceresota Mill Ltd,
211 B.R. 315 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 1997) (Chapter 11)
http://ls.wustl.edu/8th.cir/Opinions/BAP/970815/976012.P8
Bankruptcy
Court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to consider
untimely objections to a request for attorney fees.
Bachman v.
Laughlin (In Re McKeeman),
No. 99-6029NE (B.A.P. 8th Cir. August 3, 1999) (Schermer)
(before Hill, Schermer, Dreher)
Appellate
Court deferred to the Bankruptcy Court for judgments
pertaining to the competitiveness and development of its local
legal community and found no abuse of discretion in Bankruptcy
Court's reducing chapter 13 debtor's attorney fee request.
Decisions regarding an award of attorney fees are subject to
the abuse of discretion standard. An abuse of discretion
occurs in this context "if the bankruptcy judge fails to
apply the proper legal standard, fails to follow proper
procedures in making the determination, or bases an award upon
finds of fact that are clearly erroneous. To be clearly
erroneous, after reviewing the record, the Appellate Court
must be left with the definite and firm impression that a
mistake has been committed. Finally, the appellate review is
limited in deference to the bankruptcy judge's familiarity
with the work performed by the professional. The lodestar
method is the appropriate approach for determining reasonable
compensation under 11 U.S.C. § 330. Here the Bankruptcy Court
conducted a lodestar analysis and specifically referred to and
applied the Johnson criteria in
determining the reasonable number of hours for the services
provided and the reasonable hourly rate for such services. The
Appellate Court held that the lower court may consider
customary fee charges, and found that it was not unreasonable
to reject full hourly rate for travel time.
Pruss v.
Pelofsky, Stock, and Butler (In Re Sauer),
97-6102/6103/6104/6105NE (Bankr. D. Neb. 1998) (Kressel) (before
Kressel, Hill, and Federman)
http://ls.wustl.edu/8th.cir/Opinions/BAP/980805/976102.P8
The Appellate
Court affirmed that portion of the Bankruptcy Court's order
disallowing attorney fees for the reason that Pruss and the
partnership law firm were no longer disinterested persons and
held an adverse interest after the debtor's attorney purchased
the debtor's residence. However, "notwithstanding the
severity of Pruss' professional conduct," …the Court
held …."that the bankruptcy court abused its discretion
in ordering the disgorgement of all fees."[an amount
exceeding $81,000] Mitigating factors weighed against
disgorgement of the entire amount. The Court reduced the
disgorgement amount to $43,354.21.
Chamberlain v.
Kula, 213 B.R.
729 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 1997)
(Judge Koger)
(before Koger, Hill, and Dreher)
http://ls.wustl.edu/8th.cir/Opinions/BAP/971031/976014.P8
Appellate Court
concluded that in making professional fee awards, bankruptcy
courts must either make an express lodestar calculation or
make a finding that the lodestar method is inappropriate under
the circumstances. Although there is no question that
Chamberlin was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his fee
application, the type of hearing required lies within the
sound discretion of the bankruptcy judge and would not
necessarily require the presentation of oral testimony. The
case was reversed and remanded to the bankruptcy court for a
lodestar calculation in accordance with the opinion.
Nelson v.
Mickleson (In Re Pfleghaar),
215 B.R. 394 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 1997) (Chief Judge
Koger) (before Koger, Hill, and Scott)
(Chapter 13)
Appellate Court
reversed and remanded to the Bankruptcy Court. If the
Bankruptcy Court must conduct a hearing, though not
necessarily a full evidentiary hearing, before denying an
attorney fee application.
In Re McDaniel,
Bk. No. 97-80661 (Bankr. D. Neb. October 10, 1997) (Judge
Timothy J. Mahoney)
Chapter 13
debtor’s marriage was dissolved in Sarpy County District,
and custody of the children was awarded to the ex-wife who
later relocated to Texas. During the children’s summer
visitation with the debtor, Steven McDaniel filed a Motion for
Temporary Custody in Sarpy County District Court. Ex-wife had
to travel to Nebraska to litigate the matter, and the state
district court found that under the UCCJA (Uniform Child
Custody Jurisdiction Act) that Texas was a more appropriate
forum to litigate the custody and visitation matters. The
state district court also ordered the debtor to pay $1500
toward the ex-wife’s attorney fees, but did not specifically
state that such award was for support and did not, in the
order, compare the financial status of the parties. Debtor and
his current wife filed chapter 13 bankruptcy and sought to
treat the $1500 attorney fee award as a general unsecured
claim which would be discharged with little or no payment
under the plan. The Bankruptcy Court ruled in favor of the ex
wife and held that the award of attorney fees was in the
nature of support and was excepted from discharge by 11 U.S.C.
§ § 523(a)(5) and 1328(a)(2).
In Re James
Shurts, Bk. No.
96-81449 (Bankr. D. Neb. October 28, 1997) (Chapter 13) (Judge
Timothy J. Mahoney)
Creditor’s
attorney receives administrative expense for fees for
assisting in the case.
In Re Eva Mae
Walker, Bk. No.
94-81092 (Bankr. D. Neb. March 22, 19950 (Chapter 13) (Judge
Timothy J. Mahoney)
The Court ruled
that "an attorney for a Chapter 13 debtor should be aware
that post-petition fees cannot be paid or received without
court approval and that such fees should be paid through the
trustee."
In Re Malewicki,
142 B.R. 353 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1992), Neb. Bkr. 92:196, aff.d
Neb. Bkr. 92:555 (D. Neb. November 30, 1992) (District Judge
Warren K. Urbom)(Chapter 13)
(Judge Minahan)
Court explained
that in general the reasonableness of an attorney fee
application is determined by calculating a general lodestarr
amount using a reasonable hourly rate multiplied by actual
time expended. Court applied the factors enumerated in Johnson
v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc., 488 F.2d 714 (5th
Cir. 1974) in detail to the attorney fee application.
|