.jpg)
Disclosure of fees in adversary case pursuant to Section
Do you see disclosure as being required where fees are being paid by a
third party? If so, do you see disclosure of the identity of the third
party as also being required?
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:40 PM, 'Mark J. Markus' bklawr@yahoo.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
>
>
> You just file the form with the amounts you're being paid in the
> adversary with an explanation (e.g. "$5,000 retainer to be billed hourly
> at $X per hour", or whatever)
>
> It's required because the attorney is "representing a debtor in a case
> under this title, or in connection with such case" pursuant to 329(a).
>
> I don't think the distinction of it being paid with funds not from
> property of the estate is relevant. See 11 U.S.C. 329(b). Disgorgement
> can be ordered to "the entity that made such payment". A third party
> payment is never property of the estate, so that distinction doesn't seem
> to excuse compliance.
>
>
> --
>
> *************************
> Mark J. Markus
> Law Office of Mark J. Markus
> *Mailing Address Only:*
> 11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
> Studio City, CA 91604-2652
> (818)509-1173 (818)332-1180 (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
> ________________________________________________
> 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 2/18/2015 9:56 PM, Kirk Brennan kirkinhermosa@gmail.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
> Assuming disclosure is desirable, how would that be done for an attorney
> who represents chapter 7 debtor only in an adversary proceeding (not in the
> underlying case)?
> Since postpetition income in a chapter 7 isnt property of the estate, why
> would disclosure of fees paid from postpetition funds be necessary?
> On Feb 18, 2015 9:21 PM, "cdcbaa cdcbaamailbox@gmail.com [cdcbaa]" cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Be careful. Nondisclosed fees are subject to disgorgement.
>>
>> d
>>
>> Dennis McGoldrick, 350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B, Torrance, Ca 90503
>> 310-328-1001-voice
>> [image: cid:part1.03050307.05030101@bklaw.com]
>>
>> On Jan 30, 2015, at 8:30 PM, jesseelaw@aol.com [cdcbaa] > cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> If an attorney represents a Chapter 7 debtor in an adversary proceeding
>> do Section 329(a) and FRBP 2016(b) apply requiring disclosure of fees paid
>> to the attorney for representation in the adversary? Section 329(a)
>> requires an attorney for debtor under, or in connection with, a case under
>> Title 11 to file statements (i.e. under FRBP 2016(B)) disclosing any
>> compensation received 1 year or less prior to the bankruptcy case being
>> filed. A supplemental statement is required within 15 days after any
>> additional payment or agreement not previously disclosed. My research did
>> not find anything at all on the topic outside the code and FRBP. I do not
>> see any exceptions for adversary cases as they are under title 11. The
>> disclosure of compensation for attorney of Debtor form has a section
>> relating to services for adversary proceedings and other contested
>> matters. It seems to me that the plain language of Section 329(a) and FRBP
>> 2016(b) require full disclosure of attorney fees paid and agreed to be paid
>> in the adversary case when representing a party that is the debtor in the
>> underlying case. Yet, I researched some of our esteemed colleagues>> on pacer and see no supplemental disclosures of attorney fees filed in
>> Chapter 7 cases where they were representing debtors in the Chapter 7
>> adversary case. How are the rest of you representing debtors in adversary
>> cases handling disclosure of compensation?
>>
>> I understand the rationale of requiring disclosure of attorney
>> compensation relating to debtor representation in the underlying bankruptcy
>> case to ensure there is no abuse, but I am struggling with this concept in
>> the Chapter 7 adversary context for fees paid from postpetition acquired
>> monies that are not part of the estate. Especially in defending against a
>> dischargeability action it seems to place the debtor at a distinct
>> disadvantage to the plaintiff when the plaintiff is able to tell exactly
>> what the defendants attorney is being paid and by whom. This is
>> particularly the case when the creditors counsel receives instantaneous
>> notification through pacer of filed supplemental 2016(b) statements. The
>> creditor then can see the fees the debtor managed to pay or some relative
>> paid for them and hold out for more money in settlement, putting the debtor
>> at a distinct disadvantage in negotiations.
>>
>>
>>
>> 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)
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Kirk Brennan
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the
exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error,
please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this
message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
message.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not
constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not
be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the
purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal
Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion
letters containing the signature of a director.
Do you see disclosure as being required where fees are being paid by a third party? If so, do you see disclosure of the identity of the third party as also being required?On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:40 PM, 'Mark J. Markus' bklawr@yahoo.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
You just file the form with the amounts you're being paid in the
adversary with an explanation (e.g. "$5,000 retainer to be billed
hourly at $X per hour", or whatever)
It's required because the attorney is "representing a debtor in a
case under this title, or in connection with such case" pursuant
to 329(a).
I don't think the distinction of it being paid with funds not from
property of the estate is relevant. See 11 U.S.C. 329(b). Disgorgement can be ordered to "the entity that made such
payment". A third party payment is never property of the estate,
so that distinction doesn't seem to excuse compliance.
--
*************************
Mark J. Markus
Law Office of Mark J. Markus
Mailing Address Only:
11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
Studio City, CA 91604-2652
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Assuming disclosure is desirable, how would that be done for an attorney
who represents chapter 7 debtor only in an adversary proceeding (not in the
underlying case)?
Since postpetition income in a chapter 7 isnt property of the estate, why
would disclosure of fees paid from postpetition funds be necessary?
On Feb 18, 2015 9:21 PM, "cdcbaa cdcbaamailbox@gmail.com [cdcbaa]" wrote:
>
>
> Be careful. Nondisclosed fees are subject to disgorgement.
>
> d
>
> Dennis McGoldrick, 350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B, Torrance, Ca 90503
> 310-328-1001-voice
> [image: cid:part1.03050307.05030101@bklaw.com]
>
> On Jan 30, 2015, at 8:30 PM, jesseelaw@aol.com [cdcbaa] cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> If an attorney represents a Chapter 7 debtor in an adversary proceeding do
> Section 329(a) and FRBP 2016(b) apply requiring disclosure of fees paid to
> the attorney for representation in the adversary? Section 329(a) requires
> an attorney for debtor under, or in connection with, a case under Title 11
> to file statements (i.e. under FRBP 2016(B)) disclosing any compensation
> received 1 year or less prior to the bankruptcy case being filed. A
> supplemental statement is required within 15 days after any additional
> payment or agreement not previously disclosed. My research did not find
> anything at all on the topic outside the code and FRBP. I do not see any
> exceptions for adversary cases as they are under title 11. The disclosure
> of compensation for attorney of Debtor form has a section relating to
> services for adversary proceedings and other contested matters. It seems
> to me that the plain language of Section 329(a) and FRBP 2016(b) require
> full disclosure of attorney fees paid and agreed to be paid in the
> adversary case when representing a party that is the debtor in the
> underlying case. Yet, I researched some of our esteemed colleagues> on pacer and see no supplemental disclosures of attorney fees filed in
> Chapter 7 cases where they were representing debtors in the Chapter 7
> adversary case. How are the rest of you representing debtors in adversary
> cases handling disclosure of compensation?
>
> I understand the rationale of requiring disclosure of attorney
> compensation relating to debtor representation in the underlying bankruptcy
> case to ensure there is no abuse, but I am struggling with this concept in
> the Chapter 7 adversary context for fees paid from postpetition acquired
> monies that are not part of the estate. Especially in defending against a
> dischargeability action it seems to place the debtor at a distinct
> disadvantage to the plaintiff when the plaintiff is able to tell exactly
> what the defendants attorney is being paid and by whom. This is
> particularly the case when the creditors counsel receives instantaneous
> notification through pacer of filed supplemental 2016(b) statements. The
> creditor then can see the fees the debtor managed to pay or some relative
> paid for them and hold out for more money in settlement, putting the debtor
> at a distinct disadvantage in negotiations.
>
>
>
> 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)
>
>
>
>
Assuming disclosure is desirable, how would that be done for an attorney who represents chapter 7 debtor only in an adversary proceeding (not in the underlying case)?
Since postpetition income in a chapter 7 isnt property of the estate, why would disclosure of fees paid from postpetition funds be necessary?
On Feb 18, 2015 9:21 PM, "cdcbaa cdcbaamailbox@gmail.com [cdcbaa]" <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Hello. My anecdotal understanding is that the form is required at all times
but that at least in the central district, practitioners do not file it and
the judges live with it.
I wouldn't be surprised if this issue becomes a bigger deal in the
relatively near future.
Does anyone file these?
Sincerely,
*Michael Avanesian, Esq. *AVANESIAN LAW FIRM
101 N. Brand Blvd., PH 1920
Glendale, California 91203
Tel: 818.276.2477 Fax: 818.208.4550
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 8:30 PM, jesseelaw@aol.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> If an attorney represents a Chapter 7 debtor in an adversary proceeding do
> Section 329(a) and FRBP 2016(b) apply requiring disclosure of fees paid to
> the attorney for representation in the adversary? Section 329(a) requires
> an attorney for debtor under, or in connection with, a case under Title 11
> to file statements (i.e. under FRBP 2016(B)) disclosing any compensation
> received 1 year or less prior to the bankruptcy case being filed. A
> supplemental statement is required within 15 days after any additional
> payment or agreement not previously disclosed. My research did not find
> anything at all on the topic outside the code and FRBP. I do not see any
> exceptions for adversary cases as they are under title 11. The disclosure
> of compensation for attorney of Debtor form has a section relating to
> services for adversary proceedings and other contested matters. It seems
> to me that the plain language of Section 329(a) and FRBP 2016(b) require
> full disclosure of attorney fees paid and agreed to be paid in the
> adversary case when representing a party that is the debtor in the
> underlying case. Yet, I researched some of our esteemed colleagues> on pacer and see no supplemental disclosures of attorney fees filed in
> Chapter 7 cases where they were representing debtors in the Chapter 7
> adversary case. How are the rest of you representing debtors in adversary
> cases handling disclosure of compensation?
>
> I understand the rationale of requiring disclosure of attorney
> compensation relating to debtor representation in the underlying bankruptcy
> case to ensure there is no abuse, but I am struggling with this concept in
> the Chapter 7 adversary context for fees paid from postpetition acquired
> monies that are not part of the estate. Especially in defending against a
> dischargeability action it seems to place the debtor at a distinct
> disadvantage to the plaintiff when the plaintiff is able to tell exactly
> what the defendants attorney is being paid and by whom. This is
> particularly the case when the creditors counsel receives instantaneous
> notification through pacer of filed supplemental 2016(b) statements. The
> creditor then can see the fees the debtor managed to pay or some relative
> paid for them and hold out for more money in settlement, putting the debtor
> at a distinct disadvantage in negotiations.
>
>
>
> 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)
>
>
>
>
Hello. My anecdotal understanding is that the form is required at all times but that at least in the central district, practitioners do not file it and the judges live with it.I wouldn't be surprised if this issue becomes a bigger deal in the relatively near future.Does anyone file these?AVANESIAN
LAW FIRM101
N. Brand Blvd., PH 1920Glendale,
California 91203Tel:
818.276.2477 Fax: 818.208.4550
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 8:30 PM, jesseelaw@aol.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
If an attorney represents a Chapter 7 debtor in an adversary proceeding do Section 329(a) and FRBP 2016(b) apply requiring disclosure of fees paid to the attorney for representation in the adversary?with, a case under Title 11 to file statements (i.e. under FRBP 2016(B)) disclosing any compensation received 1 year or less prior to the bankruptcy case being filed. A supplemental statement is required within 15 days after any additional payment or agreement not previously disclosed. My research did not find anything at all on the topic outside the code and FRBP. I do not see any exceptions for adversary cases as they are under title 11. The disclosure of compensation for attorney of Debtor form has a section relating to services for adversary proceedings and other contested matters. It seems to me that the plain language of Section 329(a) and FRBP 2016(b) require full disclosure of attorney fees paid and agreed to be paid in the adversary case when representing a party that is the debtor in the underlying case. Yet, I researched some of our esteemed colleagues cases on pacer and see no supplemental disclosures of attorney fees filed in Chapter 7 cases where they were representing debtors in the Chapter 7 adversary case. How are the rest of you representing debtors in adversary cases handling disclosure of compensation?I understand the rationale of requiring disclosure of attorney compensation relating to debtor representation in the underlying bankruptcy case to ensure there is no abuse, but I am struggling with this concept in the Chapter 7 adversary context for fees paid from postpetition acquired monies that are not part of the estate. Especially in defending against a dischargeability action it seems to place the debtor at a distinct disadvantage to the plaintiff when the plaintiff is able to tell exactly what the defendants attorney is being paid and by whom. This is particularly the case when the creditors counsel receives instantaneous notification through pacer of filed supplemental 2016(b) statements.lative paid for them and hold out for more money in settlement, putting the debtor at a distinct disadvantage in negotiations.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)
The post was migrated from Yahoo.