.jpg)
Chapter 13 Supplemental Attorney Fees Application
If you think fold is a proper noun, like "Christ", then you should put a hyphen between tri, and fold. If you think "fold" is not a proper noun, then trifold is correct.
Me, I think Christ is way more important than fold, so I attach the prefix.
d
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 28, 2013, at 9:25 AM, "sambenevento" wrote:
>
> For what it is worth, we also mail to the entire matrix as maintained by ECF. But we redact the clear duplicates and those on the ECF list, plus we shrink the mailings to 4 per page, double sided, tri-folded with no envelopes. And I have no idea if tri-fold is supposed to have a hyphen.
>
> --- In cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com, cdcbaa wrote:
> >
> > Group:
> >
> > The court cannot tell which addresses are duplicate, wrong, etc.
> > So the court can only look at the whole list to see if you properly served the creditors. I cannot imagine how you would prove the negative that addresses are wrong, so at my office, we just serve the whole list.
> >
> > d
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Jun 25, 2013, at 10:59 AM, Mark Jessee wrote:
> >
> > > Change of address forms for creditor filed by debtor are rejected by the clerk in my experience and they require a matrix amendment fee. When not rejected, most times the address is not updated. Even with filing the amended matrix the CM/ECF creditor list is not always updated and old addresses are never deleted. Hence this is why I do not find the CM/ECF creditor list very useful, especially farther into chapter 13 cases.
> > >
> > > So again the question is does LBR 3015(x)'s requirement to serve all creditors mean we need to use the CM/ECF creditor list for service with all the superfluous names and addresses? VK seems to be saying we do....
> > >
> > > Mark Jessee
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > On Jun 25, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Kirk Brennan wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> So perhaps the best practice is to amend the matrix to exclude redundant addresses and then use the matrix for service of supplemental fee apps over $1000.
> > >>
> > >> On Jun 25, 2013 12:30 PM, "Catherine Christiansen" wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> If the creditor is already listed then filing a change of address is free and I believe also updates the BNC
> > >>>
> > >>> Sent from my iPhone
> > >>>
> > >>> On Jun 25, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Link Schrader wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The Court will automatically (usually) update from POCs and transfers of claims. A $30 amendment fee is charged to add or delete creditors, DEF, so I normally update my master mailing list to ensure I am serving necessary parties and only amend DEF when necessary for the Court's service. Even then it might be easier toward the end of the case for me to separately serve a party not served through the BNC.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Jun 25, 2013 6:04 AM, "Kirk Brennan" wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> How do you update the creditir list? By filing an amended creditor matrix?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Jun 25, 2013 1:58 AM, "Link Schrader" wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Not just wise to update the creditors' list based upon the POC, but a requirement of the FRBP. When a POC lists a "notices to this address" then that is the proper address where notices should be sent, not the address the debtor originally listed on the schedules.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> www.schrader-law.com
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________________________
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:55 PM, bertbri@... wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> perhaps it would be wise for us to update the creditors list upon receipt of POC?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13roups.com CC:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim. What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Mark Jessee
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
> > >>>>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
> > >>>>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
> > >>>>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
> > >>>>>> CA 92701
> > >>>>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
> > >>>>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
> > >>>>>> www.schrader-law.com
> > >>>>>> __________________________________________________________
> > >>>>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
> > >>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
> > >>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
> > >>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
> > >>>> CA 92701
> > >>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
> > >>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
> > >>>> www.schrader-law.com
> > >>>> __________________________________________________________
> > >>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender. Thank you for your cooperation.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (7)
> > >>>> RECENT ACTIVITY:
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Thanks Mark! Very helpful.
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:20 PM, wrote:
> **
>
>
> **
> I include a declaration authenticating my time ledger and cv and to
> support the reasonableness and necessity of the efforts. When the
> application request is larger or if the time might appear higher than usual
> I provide more detail. That said, know your judge. I've learned the hard
> way that some judges do not require all the detail set forth in the local
> rules and pretty much award a set amount for particular motions regardless
> of the intricacies or costs involved of a particular case.
>
> Mark T. Jessee
> Law Offices of Mark T. Jessee
> "A Debt Relief Agency"
> 50 W. Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200
> Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
> (805) 497-5868 (805) 497-5864 (Facsimile)
>
>
>
> In a message dated 7/1/2013 2:26:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> attorneychristine@gmail.com writes:
>
>
>
> On the motion itself, are you all including a declaration with your
> motions?
>
> If so, what are you declaring to?
>
> Reason for the question is a Trustee response I received.
>
> Thanks, Christine
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Mark Jessee wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>> Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for
>> supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
>>
>> I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I
>> allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all
>> creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue
>> raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the
>> CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to
>> me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of
>> creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes
>> every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the
>> start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old
>> addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new
>> addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
>>
>> Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require
>> service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR
>> 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense
>> unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad
>> addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on
>> the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to
>> mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those
>> which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the
>> specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any
>> amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve
>> notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they
>> chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim.
>> What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of
>> claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
>>
>> Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be
>> required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim
>> as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several
>> different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to
>> do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges
>> consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of
>> motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and
>> filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not
>> entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this
>> equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor
>> List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
>>
>> I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF
>> Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
>>
>> Mark Jessee
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Christine A. Wilton, Esq.
> Law Office of Christine A. Wilton
>
> *Our New Office Location:
> 12650 Hoover Street
> Garden Grove, CA 92841*
>
> *Mailing:*
> 4067 Hardwick Street, Suite 335
> Lakewood, CA 90712
>
> Office: 877-631-2220
> Cell: 562-824-7563
> Fax: 1-636-212-7078
> Email: attorneychristine@gmail.com
> Web: www.attorneychristine.com
> Blog: www.losangelesbankruptcylawmonitor.com
> ***************************
> Confidentiality and Privilege. This e-mail message, including attachments,
> is intended solely for review by the intended recipient(s) and may contain
> confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
> disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. Review by anyone other than the
> intended recipient(s) shall not constitute a waiver of any ATTORNEY-CLIENT
> PRIVILEGE or ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION that may apply to this
> communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
> sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
>
> Tax Advice Disclosure. Any tax information or written tax advice contained
> in this email message, including attachments, is not intended to and cannot
> be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may
> be imposed on the taxpayer. (The foregoing legend has been affixed pursuant
> to U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.)
>
>
>
Christine A. Wilton, Esq.
Law Office of Christine A. Wilton
*Our New Office Location:
12650 Hoover Street
Garden Grove, CA 92841*
*Mailing:*
4067 Hardwick Street, Suite 335
Lakewood, CA 90712
Office: 877-631-2220
Cell: 562-824-7563
Fax: 1-636-212-7078
Email: attorneychristine@gmail.com
Web: www.attorneychristine.com
Blog: www.losangelesbankruptcylawmonitor.com
***************************
Confidentiality and Privilege. This e-mail message, including attachments,
is intended solely for review by the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. Review by anyone other than the
intended recipient(s) shall not constitute a waiver of any ATTORNEY-CLIENT
PRIVILEGE or ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION that may apply to this
communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Tax Advice Disclosure. Any tax information or written tax advice contained
in this email message, including attachments, is not intended to and cannot
be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may
be imposed on the taxpayer. (The foregoing legend has been affixed pursuant
to U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.)
Thanks Mark! Very helpful.On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:20 PM, <jesseelaw@aol.com> wrote:
I include a declaration authenticating my time ledger and cv and to support
the reasonableness and necessity of the efforts. When the
applicationrequest islarger or if the time might appear higher than
usual I provide more detail. That said, know your judge. I've
learned the hard way that some judges do not require all the detail set forth in
the local rules and pretty much award a set amount for particular motions
regardless of the intricacies or costs involvedofa particular
case.
Mark T.
JesseeLaw Offices of Mark T. Jessee"A Debt Relief Agency"50 W.
Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200Thousand Oaks, CA 91360(805) 497-5868 (805)
497-5864 (Facsimile)
In a message dated 7/1/2013 2:26:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
attorneychristine@gmail.com writes:
On the motion itself, are you all including a declaration with your
motions? If so, what are you declaring to?Reason for the
question is a Trustee response I received.Thanks,
Christine
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Mark Jessee <jesseelaw@aol.com> wrote:
Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for
supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case? I just had a
supplemental fee application order rejected because I allegedly failed to
serve the notice of motion and fee application on all creditors listed in
the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue raised in 17 years. Are
we required to serve every party listed on the CMECF Creditor List? Using
the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of creditors with an actual
interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes every name and address listed
in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the start of the case including
assignors and agents from long ago and old addresses that creditors
subsequently updated and superceded with new addresses in their filed proofs
of claim.Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors"
pursuant to LBR 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service
makes sense unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I
eliminate the bad addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted
"all creditors" to mean only those creditors that had an interest in the
case, namely those which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to
serve them at the specific address designated for service in the proof of
claim or any amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to
serve notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after
they chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of
claim. What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof
of claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be
required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim
as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several different
addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to do with the
claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges consider all the
time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of motion, and
addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and filing the
proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not entitled to
compensation. For example in my particular instance this equates 49 service
packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor List instead of 12
contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.I am tilting at
windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF Creditor List and
sending out all the extra notices?Mark Jessee
-- Christine A. Wilton, Esq.Law Office of Christine A.
WiltonOur New Office Location:12650 Hoover
StreetGarden Grove, CA 92841Mailing:4067 Hardwick
Street, Suite 335Lakewood, CA 90712Office:
877-631-2220Cell: 562-824-7563Fax: 1-636-212-7078
Email: attorneychristine@gmail.comWeb: www.attorneychristine.com
Blog: www.losangelesbankruptcylawmonitor.com***************************Confidentiality and Privilege. This e-mail message, including
attachments, is intended solely for review by the intended recipient(s) and
may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,
use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. Review by anyone other than
the intended recipient(s) shall not constitute a waiver of any ATTORNEY-CLIENT
PRIVILEGE or ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION that may apply to this
communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message.Tax Advice Disclosure. Any tax information or written tax advice contained in this email message, including attachments, is not intended
to and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax
penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. (The foregoing legend has been
affixed pursuant to U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.)
-- Christine A. Wilton, Esq.Law Office of Christine A. WiltonOur New Office Location:12650 Hoover StreetGarden Grove, CA 92841Mailing:
4067 Hardwick Street, Suite 335Lakewood, CA 90712Office: 877-631-2220Cell: 562-824-7563Fax: 1-636-212-7078Email:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I include a declaration authenticating my time ledger and cv and to support the reasonableness and necessity of the efforts. When the application
request is larger or if the time might appear higher than usual I providemore detail. That said, know your judge. I've learned the hard way that some
judges do not require all the detail set forth in the local rules and
pretty much award a set amount for particular motions regardless of the
intricacies or costs involved of a particular case.
Mark T. Jessee
Law Offices of Mark T. Jessee
"A Debt Relief Agency"
50 W. Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
(805) 497-5868 (805) 497-5864 (Facsimile)
In a message dated 7/1/2013 2:26:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
attorneychristine@gmail.com writes:
On the motion itself, are you all including a declaration with your
motions?
If so, what are you declaring to?
Reason for the question is a Trustee response I received.
Thanks, Christine
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Mark Jessee wrote:
Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for
supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I
allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on allcreditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue raised in
17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the CMECF Creditor
List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to me once the bardate has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of creditors withan actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes every name and
address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the start of the case
including assignors and agents from long ago and old addresses that
creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new addresses in their filed
proofs of claim.
Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require
service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR
3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense unless a
creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad addresses
from service and only serve at the specific address designated on the
proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to mean only
those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those which filed a
proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the specific
address designated for service in the proof of claim or any amended claim/address
change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve notice on purported
creditors a few years after the bar date after they chose not to participate in
the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim. What standing do such
purported creditors which never filed a proof of claim have to object to asupplemental fee application?
Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be
required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim as to
where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several different
addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to do with the
claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of motion, and
addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and filing the proof of
service to be secretarial work for which we are not entitled to
compensation. For example in my particular instance this equates 49 service packages I
need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor List instead of 12 contained in
the respective filed proofs of claim.
I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF
Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
Mark Jessee
Christine A. Wilton, Esq.
Law Office of Christine A. Wilton
Our New Office Location:
12650 Hoover Street
Garden Grove, CA 92841
Mailing:
4067 Hardwick Street, Suite 335
Lakewood, CA 90712
Office: 877-631-2220
Cell: 562-824-7563
Fax: 1-636-212-7078
Email: _attorneychristine@gmail.com_ (mailto:attorneychristine@gmail.com)
Web: _www.attorneychristine.com_ (http://www.attorneychristine.com/)
Blog: _www.losangelesbankruptcylawmonitor.com_
(http://www.losangelesbankruptcylawmonitor.com/)
***************************
Confidentiality and Privilege. This e-mail message, including attachments,is intended solely for review by the intended recipient(s) and may containconfidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. Review by anyone other than theintended recipient(s) shall not constitute a waiver of any ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE or ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION that may apply to this
communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Tax Advice Disclosure. Any tax information or written tax advice containedin this email message, including attachments, is not intended to and
cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that
may be imposed on the taxpayer. (The foregoing legend has been affixed
pursuant to U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.)
I include a declaration authenticating my time ledger and cv and to support
the reasonableness and necessity of the efforts. When the
application request is larger or if the time might appear higher than
usual I provide more detail. That said, know your judge. I've
learned the hard way that some judges do not require all the detail set forth in
the local rules and pretty much award a set amount for particular motions
regardless of the intricacies or costs involved of a particular
case.
Mark T.
JesseeLaw Offices of Mark T. Jessee"A Debt Relief Agency"50 W.Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200Thousand Oaks, CA 91360(805) 497-5868 (805)
497-5864 (Facsimile)
In a message dated 7/1/2013 2:26:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
attorneychristine@gmail.com writes:
On the motion itself, are you all including a declaration with your
motions? If so, what are you declaring to?Reason for the
question is a Trustee response I received.Thanks,
Christine
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Mark Jessee <jesseelaw@aol.com> wrote:
Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for
supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case? I just had a
supplemental fee application order rejected because I allegedly failed to
serve the notice of motion and fee application on all creditors listed in
the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue raised in 17 years. Are
we required to serve every party listed on the CMECF Creditor List? Using
the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of creditors with an actual
interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes every name and address listed
in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the start of the case including
assignors and agents from long ago and old addresses that creditors
subsequently updated and superceded with new addresses in their filed proofs
of claim.Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors"
pursuant to LBR 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service
makes sense unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I
eliminate the bad addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted
"all creditors" to mean only those creditors that had an interest in the
case, namely those which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to
serve them at the specific address designated for service in the proof of
claim or any amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to
serve notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after
they chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of
claim. What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof
of claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be
required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim
as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several different
addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to do with the
claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges consider all the
time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of motion, and
addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and filing the
proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not entitled to
compensation. For example in my particular instance this equates 49 service
packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor List instead of 12
contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.I am tilting at
windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF Creditor List and
sending out all the extra notices?Mark Jessee
-- Christine A. Wilton, Esq.Law Office of Christine A.
WiltonOur New Office Location:12650 Hoover
StreetGarden Grove, CA 92841Mailing:4067 Hardwick
Street, Suite 335Lakewood, CA 90712Office:
877-631-2220Cell: 562-824-7563Fax: 1-636-212-7078Email: attorneychristine@gmail.comWeb: www.attorneychristine.comBlog:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
On the motion itself, are you all including a declaration with your
motions?
If so, what are you declaring to?
Reason for the question is a Trustee response I received.
Thanks, Christine
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Mark Jessee wrote:
> **
>
>
> Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for
> supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
>
> I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I
> allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all
> creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue
> raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the
> CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to
> me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of
> creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes
> every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the
> start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old
> addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new
> addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
>
> Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require
> service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR
> 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense
> unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad
> addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on
> the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to
> mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those
> which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the
> specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any
> amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve
> notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they
> chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim.
> What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of
> claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
>
> Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be
> required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim
> as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several
> different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to
> do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges
> consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of
> motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and
> filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not
> entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this
> equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor
> List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
>
> I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF
> Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
>
> Mark Jessee
>
>
>
Christine A. Wilton, Esq.
Law Office of Christine A. Wilton
*Our New Office Location:
12650 Hoover Street
Garden Grove, CA 92841*
*Mailing:*
4067 Hardwick Street, Suite 335
Lakewood, CA 90712
Office: 877-631-2220
Cell: 562-824-7563
Fax: 1-636-212-7078
Email: attorneychristine@gmail.com
Web: www.attorneychristine.com
Blog: www.losangelesbankruptcylawmonitor.com
***************************
Confidentiality and Privilege. This e-mail message, including attachments,
is intended solely for review by the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. Review by anyone other than the
intended recipient(s) shall not constitute a waiver of any ATTORNEY-CLIENT
PRIVILEGE or ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION that may apply to this
communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Tax Advice Disclosure. Any tax information or written tax advice contained
in this email message, including attachments, is not intended to and cannot
be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may
be imposed on the taxpayer. (The foregoing legend has been affixed pursuant
to U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice.)
On the motion itself, are you all including a declaration with your motions? If so, what are you declaring to?Reason for the question is a Trustee response I received.Thanks, Christine
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Mark Jessee < wrote:
Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a motion for supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because I allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000 require service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to LBR 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes sense unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate the bad addresses from service and only serve at the specific address designated on the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all creditors" to mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case, namely those which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve them at the specific address designated for service in the proof of claim or any amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to serve notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after they chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of claim. What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof of claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel should be required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof of claim as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the CMECF Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
Mark Jessee
-- Christine A. Wilton, Esq.Law Office of Christine A. WiltonOur New Office Location:12650 Hoover StreetGarden Grove, CA 92841Mailing:
4067 Hardwick Street, Suite 335Lakewood, CA 90712Office: 877-631-2220Cell: 562-824-7563Fax: 1-636-212-7078Email:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I picked up a used Sharp copier for $3000. I can set it to do 4/page, 2 sided and automatically sort and staple up to 50 copies. Plus print and scan wirelessly to all workstations. Worth the investment. I just wish I would have splurged for the color model.
>
> How do you get 4 per page?
> That's a nice feature for big mailings.
> On Jun 28, 2013 12:25 PM, "sambenevento" wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> >
> > For what it is worth, we also mail to the entire matrix as maintained by
> > ECF. But we redact the clear duplicates and those on the ECF list, plus we
> > shrink the mailings to 4 per page, double sided, tri-folded with no
> > envelopes. And I have no idea if tri-fold is supposed to have a hyphen.
> >
> > --- In cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com, cdcbaa wrote:
> > >
> > > Group:
> > >
> > > The court cannot tell which addresses are duplicate, wrong, etc.
> > > So the court can only look at the whole list to see if you properly
> > served the creditors. I cannot imagine how you would prove the negative
> > that addresses are wrong, so at my office, we just serve the whole list.
> > >
> > > d
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > On Jun 25, 2013, at 10:59 AM, Mark Jessee wrote:
> > >
> > > > Change of address forms for creditor filed by debtor are rejected by
> > the clerk in my experience and they require a matrix amendment fee. When
> > not rejected, most times the address is not updated. Even with filing the
> > amended matrix the CM/ECF creditor list is not always updated and old
> > addresses are never deleted. Hence this is why I do not find the CM/ECF
> > creditor list very useful, especially farther into chapter 13 cases.
> > > >
> > > > So again the question is does LBR 3015(x)'s requirement to serve all
> > creditors mean we need to use the CM/ECF creditor list for service with all
> > the superfluous names and addresses? VK seems to be saying we do....
> > > >
> > > > Mark Jessee
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > > On Jun 25, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Kirk Brennan wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> So perhaps the best practice is to amend the matrix to exclude
> > redundant addresses and then use the matrix for service of supplemental fee
> > apps over $1000.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Jun 25, 2013 12:30 PM, "Catherine Christiansen"
> > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> If the creditor is already listed then filing a change of address is
> > free and I believe also updates the BNC
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Sent from my iPhone
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Jun 25, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Link Schrader wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> The Court will automatically (usually) update from POCs and
> > transfers of claims. A $30 amendment fee is charged to add or delete
> > creditors, DEF, so I normally update my master mailing list to ensure I am
> > serving necessary parties and only amend DEF when necessary for the Court's
> > service. Even then it might be easier toward the end of the case for me to
> > separately serve a party not served through the BNC.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Jun 25, 2013 6:04 AM, "Kirk Brennan" wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> How do you update the creditir list? By filing an amended creditor
> > matrix?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Jun 25, 2013 1:58 AM, "Link Schrader" wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Not just wise to update the creditors' list based upon the POC,
> > but a requirement of the FRBP. When a POC lists a "notices to this address"
> > then that is the proper address where notices should be sent, not the
> > address the debtor originally listed on the schedules.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> www.schrader-law.com
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> __________________________________________________________
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain
> > information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from
> > disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the
> > individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use,
> > dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> > you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender.
> > Thank you for your cooperation.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:55 PM, bertbri@
> > wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> perhaps it would be wise for us to update the creditors list
> > upon receipt of POC?
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G
> > network.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- Subject: [cdcbaa] Chapter 13
> > cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com CC:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Who are the interested creditors that must be served with a
> > motion for supplemental attorney fees in a Chapter 13 case?
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> I just had a supplemental fee application order rejected because
> > I allegedly failed to serve the notice of motion and fee application on all
> > creditors listed in the CMECF Creditor List. I have never had this issue
> > raised in 17 years. Are we required to serve every party listed on the
> > CMECF Creditor List? Using the CMECF Creditor List does not make sense to
> > me once the bar date has passed. This list is not a quality compilation of
> > creditors with an actual interest in the Chapter 13 case, but includes
> > every name and address listed in the creditor matrix as a precaution at the
> > start of the case including assignors and agents from long ago and old
> > addresses that creditors subsequently updated and superceded with new
> > addresses in their filed proofs of claim.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Motions for supplemental fees in Chapter 13 cases over $1,000
> > require service on the debtor, the trustee and "all creditors" pursuant to
> > LBR 3015-1(x). Prior to the bar date using this list for service makes
> > sense unless a creditor filed a proof of claim, in which case I eliminate
> > the bad addresses from service and only serve at the specific address
> > designated on the proof of claim. After the bar date I interpreted "all
> > creditors" to mean only those creditors that had an interest in the case,
> > namely those which filed a proof of claim. Those I winnowed down to serve
> > them at the specific address designated for service in the proof of claim
> > or any amended claim/address change notice, etc. Why should we need to
> > serve notice on purported creditors a few years after the bar date after
> > they chose not to participate in the bankruptcy case by filing a proof of
> > claim. What standing do such purported creditors which never filed a proof
> > of claim have to object to a supplemental fee application?
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Furthermore, it makes no sense to me that Debtor's counsel
> > should be required to ignore a creditor's written instructions in its proof
> > of claim as to where to serve notices and send creditors notices to several
> > different addresses and to collection agents/attorneys who have nothing to
> > do with the claim any more. This seems especially absurd when judges
> > consider all the time spent making all the extra copies of the notice of
> > motion, and addressing and stuffing the envelopes as well as preparing and
> > filing the proof of service to be secretarial work for which we are not
> > entitled to compensation. For example in my particular instance this
> > equates 49 service packages I need to serve based upon the CMECF Creditor
> > List instead of 12 contained in the respective filed proofs of claim.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> I am tilting at windmills here? Is everybody else just using the
> > CMECF Creditor List and sending out all the extra notices?
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Mark Jessee
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
> > > >>>>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
> > > >>>>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
> > > >>>>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
> > > >>>>>> CA 92701
> > > >>>>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
> > > >>>>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
> > > >>>>>> www.schrader-law.com
> > > >>>>>> __________________________________________________________
> > > >>>>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain
> > information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from
> > disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the
> > individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use,
> > dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> > you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender.
> > Thank you for your cooperation.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Link Schrader, Attorney
> > > >>>> Law Office of Link W. Schrader
> > > >>>> Mail: P.O. Box 3723, Tustin, CA 92781
> > > >>>> Office: 106 W. 4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana,
> > > >>>> CA 92701
> > > >>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
> > > >>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
> > > >>>> www.schrader-law.com
> > > >>>> __________________________________________________________
> > > >>>> This communication and any files transmitted with it contain
> > information which is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from
> > disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the
> > individual or intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any use,
> > dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> > you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender.
> > Thank you for your cooperation.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic
> > Messages in this topic (7)
> > > >>>> RECENT ACTIVITY:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Im surprised there arent local rules about printing multiple pages on one
page. It seems like a great way to save money on printer ink, paper, and
labor.
**
And remember folks, Motions don't always have to be served on everyone.
Frequently a descriptive notice of the contents of the motion with
instructions on how to obtain a copy from the court file (or counsel) is
sufficient.
*************************
Mark J. Markus
Law Office of Mark J. Markus
11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
Studio City, CA 91604-2652
(818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
web: http://www.bklaw.com/
Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist--The State Bar of California Board of
Legal Specialization
This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what this means at
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I do it on everyone except the Judge!
Jonathan D. Leventhal, Esq.
Leventhal Law Group, P. C.
818.347.5800
To: "cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: 06/28/2013 2:58 PM
Subject: RE: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Supplemental Attorney Fees Application
Can you do that for service, shrink the page to four per?
Im guessing you dont do that on the Judges copy.
Best regards
Larry Webb
State Bar of California 229344
Central District California
"A Debt Relief Agency"
Check out my Blog
Larry@webbklaw. com
Law Offices of Larry Webb
484 Mobil Ste 43
Camarillo Ca 93010
P 805.987.1400
F 805.987.2866
C 805.750.2150
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
On Exhibts, I will sometimes go to 16 per page double sided. If they want a full size copy then it can be provided, but have not has one request yet.Try to keep those on a standard postage weight of one ounce.
Of course, Judge's copy is full size, with tabs, and single sided only.
________________________________
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Supplemental Attorney Fees Application
Never on the Judge's copy. I do it on large service documents and attach one page that advises that upon request, a full sized copy will be provided.
*************************
Mark J. Markus
Law Office of Mark J. Markus
11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
Studio City, CA 91604-2652
(818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
web: http://www.bklaw.com/
Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist--The State Bar of
California Board of Legal Specialization
This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency (see what
this means at http://www.bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/20 ... efinition/)
________________________________________________
NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the
law office of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The
information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If
you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copy,
distribution or use of the contents of this message is
prohibited.
IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with
requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S.
tax advice contained in this communication (or in any
attachment) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot
be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the
Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or
recommending to another party any transaction or matter
addressed in this communication.
On 6/28/2013 2:58 PM, Larry Webb wrote:
Can you do that for service, shrink the page to four per?
>
>Im guessing you dont do that on the Judges copy.
>
>
>
>Best regards
>
>
>Larry Webb
>State Bar of California 229344
>Central District California
>"A Debt Relief Agency"
>Check out my Blog
>
>
>Larry@webbklaw. com
>Law Offices of Larry Webb
>484 Mobil Ste 43
>Camarillo Ca 93010
>
>P 805.987.1400
>F 805.987.2866
>C 805.750.2150
>
>
>From:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark J. Markus
>Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 12:26 PM
>To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: Chapter 13 Supplemental Attorney Fees Application
>
>
>simple to do with adobe acrobat pro.
>
>
>
>*************************
>Mark J. Markus
>Law Office of Mark J. Markus
>11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
>Studio City, CA 91604-2652
>(818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
>web: http://www.bklaw.com/
>Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist--The State Bar
of California Board of Legal Specialization
>This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief
Agency (see what this means at http://www.bklaw.com/bankruptcy-blog/20 ... efinition/)
>________________________________________________
>NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains
information from the law office of Mark J. Markus
that may be privileged. The information is
intended for the use of the addressee only. If you
are not the addressee, note that any disclosure,
copy, distribution or use of the contents of this
message is prohibited.
>IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with
requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you
that any U.S. tax advice contained in this
communication (or in any attachment) is not
intended or written to be used, and cannot be
used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties
under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting,
marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed in this
communication.
>On 6/28/2013 9:41 AM, Kirk Brennan wrote:
>How do you get 4 per page?
>>That's a nice feature for big mailings.
>>On Jun 28, 2013 12:25 PM, "sambenevento" wrote:
>>
>>
>>For what it is worth, we also mail to the
entire matrix as maintained by ECF. But we
redact the clear duplicates and those on the
ECF list, plus we shrink the mailings to 4
per page, double sided, tri-folded with no
envelopes. And I have no idea if tri-fold is
supposed to have a hyphen.
>>
>>--- In mailto:cdcbaa%40yahoogroups.com, cdcbaa mailto:cdcbaamailbox@... wrote:
>>>
>>> Group:
>>>
>>> The court cannot tell which addresses
are duplicate, wrong, etc.
>>> So the court can only look at the whole
list to see if you properly served the
creditors. I cannot imagine how you would
prove the negative that addresses are wrong,
so at my office, we just serve the whole
list.
>>>
>>> d
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On Jun 25, 2013, at 10:59 AM, Mark
Jessee mailto:jesseelaw@... wrote:
>>>
>>> > Change of address forms for
creditor filed by debtor are rejected by the
clerk in my experience and they require a
matrix amendment fee. When not rejected,
most times the address is not updated. Even
with filing the amended matrix the CM/ECF
creditor list is not always updated and old
addresses are never deleted. Hence this is
why I do not find the CM/ECF creditor list
very useful, especially farther into chapter
13 cases.
>>> >
>>> > So again the question is does LBR
3015(x)'s requirement to serve all creditors
mean we need to use the CM/ECF creditor list
for service with all the superfluous names
and addresses? VK seems to be saying we
do....
>>> >
>>> > Mark Jessee
>>> >
>>> > Sent from my iPhone
>>> >
>>> > On Jun 25, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Kirk
Brennan mailto:kirkinhermosa@... wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> So perhaps the best practice
is to amend the matrix to exclude redundant
addresses and then use the matrix for
service of supplemental fee apps over $1000.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Jun 25, 2013 12:30 PM,
"Catherine Christiansen" mailto:christiansenlaw@... wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> If the creditor is already
listed then filing a change of address is
free and I believe also updates the BNC
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Jun 25, 2013, at 8:17
AM, Link Schrader mailto:lschrader@... wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> The Court will
automatically (usually) update from POCs and
transfers of claims. A $30 amendment fee is
charged to add or delete creditors, DEF, so
I normally update my master mailing list to
ensure I am serving necessary parties and
only amend DEF when necessary for the
Court's service. Even then it might be
easier toward the end of the case for me to
separately serve a party not served through
the BNC.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Jun 25, 2013 6:04
AM, "Kirk Brennan" mailto:kirkinhermosa@... wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> How do you update
the creditir list? By filing an amended
creditor matrix?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Jun 25, 2013
1:58 AM, "Link Schrader" mailto:lschrader@... wrote:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Not just wise
to update the creditors' list based upon the
POC, but a requirement of the FRBP. When a
POC lists a "notices to this address" then
that is the proper address where notices
should be sent, not the address the debtor
originally listed on the schedules.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Link Schrader,
Attorney
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Law Office of
Link W. Schrader
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Mail: P.O. Box
3723, Tustin, CA 92781
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Office: 106 W.
4th Street, Suite #308, Santa Ana, CA 92701
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Office: (714) 542-5922; Mobile/Text: (310) 413-6924
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> San Diego: (619) 952-8342; Fax: (310) 878-4158
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> http://www.schrader-law.com/
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Can you do that for service, shrink the page to four per?
I'm guessing you don't do that on the Judges' copy.
Best regards
Larry Webb
State Bar of California 229344
Central District California
"A Debt Relief Agency"
Check out my Blog
Larry@webbklaw. com
Law Offices of Larry Webb
484 Mobil Ste 43
Camarillo Ca 93010
P 805.987.1400
F 805.987.2866
C 805.750.2150
The post was migrated from Yahoo.