Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

I suggest either a substitution of counsel (with debtors as pro se former
counsel) or simply draft and file a Notice of Appearance.
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Michael Avanesian michael@avanesianlaw.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> I realize it might not make sense since there is no counsel to substitute
> but local rule 2091-1(b) says that one may be filed. So why not file one to
> make the record clear?
>
> I have yet to see anyone seek to be employed after confirmation of a Plan.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> *Michael Avanesian, Esq. *AVANESIAN LAW FIRM
> 101 N. Brand Blvd., PH 1920
> Glendale, California 91203
> Tel: 818.276.2477 Fax: 818.208.4550
>
> *Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
> legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
> use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
> copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
> to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
>
> *IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
> imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
> or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
> 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 herein.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Giovanni Orantes go@gobklaw.com [cdcbaa] cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I agreed to represent a corporation in a case in which the former
>> counsel's motion to withdraw had already been granted. Since such counsel
>> had already withdrawn, it doesn't seem a "substitution of counsel" form
>> would make sense since he cannot sign as current counsel because he is no
>> longer current counsel. Wouldn't filing a motion and designating myself as
>> counsel for the debtor be appearing for the corporation? Is there some
>> rule or local rule that requires the filing of some other document before
>> the corporation will be deemed to "appear" through me as its attorney in a
>> bankruptcy case? I recall arguing in litigation over whether I was
>> submitting to the court's jurisdiction simply by showing up for a CMC or
>> getting up and talking for the Court without saying I was specially
>> appearing and even that would, according to some judges, not be enough to
>> consider my act to be the acct to "appear." I specifically remember Judge
>> Zurzolo arguing with appearance attorneys that their saying they were
>> appearing specially didn't keep their appearance from being a general
>> appearance.
>>
>> I see no Code, Rule or Local Rule that requires an application to
>> employment counsel by a postconfirmation case in which there is no longer
>> an estate by operation of Section 1141(b) as reiterated in the order
>> confirming the plan. I know there is a document entitled "Notice of
>> Appearance" that is often filed, but I would file that when I'm not ready
>> to file any motions or other pleadings yet. The only citation the court
>> makes is to Rule 9011-2(a) that requires corporations to appear through
>> counsel, but I thought by filing the motion and designating myself as
>> counsel, which placed me on the docket as counsel, I was appearing.
>>
>> Any clues are appreciated.
>>
>> --
>> Giovanni Orantes, Esq.*
>> Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
>> 3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 2920
>> Los Angeles, CA 90010
>> Tel: (213) 389-4362
>> Fax: (877) 789-5776
>> e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
>> website: www.gobklaw.com
>>
>> **Certified Bankruptcy Specialist, State Bar of California, Board of
>> Legal Specialization*
>> *Board Certified - Business Bankruptcy Law - American Board of
>> Certification
>> *Board Certified - Consumer Bankruptcy Law - American Board of
>> Certification
>> Commercial Litigation
>> Estate Planning
>> Outside General Counsel
>>
>> WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
>>
>> SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN
>> BERNARDINO AND SANTA BARBARA AND THE WORLD FOR CHAPTER 11 AND 15 CASES.
>>
>> Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
>> information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
>> the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
>> responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
>> notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
>> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
>> please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
>> e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
>>
>> IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed
>> by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice
>> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
>> 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 herein.
>>
>>
>
>
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.
I suggest either a substitution of counsel (with debtors as pro se former counsel) or simply draft and file a Notice of Appearance.On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Michael Avanesian michael@avanesianlaw.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
I realize it might not make sense since there is no counsel to substitute but local rule 2091-1(b) says that one may be filed. So why not file one to make the record clear?I have yet to see anyone seek to be employed after confirmation of a Plan.Sincerely,Michael Avanesian, Esq.AVANESIAN
LAW FIRM101
N. Brand Blvd., PH 1920Glendale,
California 91203Tel:
818.276.2477 Fax: 818.208.4550Confidentiality:This electronic transmission and its contents are legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon, 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 herein.
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Giovanni Orantes go@gobklaw.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
I agreed to represent a corporation in a case in which the former counsel's motion to withdraw had already been granted. Since such counsel had already withdrawn, it doesn't seem a "substitution of counsel" form would make sense since he cannot sign as current counsel because he is no longer current counsel. Wouldn't filing a motion and designating myself as counsel for the debtor be appearing for the corporation? Is there some rule or local rule that requires the filing of some other document before the corporation will be deemed to "appear" through me as its attorney in a bankruptcy case? I recall arguing in litigation over whether I was submitting to the court's jurisdiction simply by showing up for a CMC or getting up and talking for the Court without saying I was specially appearing and even that would, according to some judges, not be enough to consider my act to be the acct to "appear." I specifically remember Judge Zurzolo arguing with appearance attorneys that their saying they were appearing specially didn't keep their appearance from being a general appearance.I see no Code, Rule or Local Rule that requires an application to employment counsel by a postconfirmation case in which there is no longer an estate by operation of Section 1141(b) as reiterated in the order confirming the plan. I know there is a document entitled "Notice of Appearance" that is often filed, but I would file that when I'm not ready to file any motions or other pleadings yet. The only citation the court makes is to Rule 9011-2(a) that requires corporations to appear through counsel, but I thought by filing the motion and designating myself as counsel, which placed me on the docket as counsel, I was appearing.Any clues are appreciated.-- Giovanni Orantes, Esq.*Orantes Law Firm, P.C.3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 2920Los Angeles, CA 90010Tel: (213) 389-4362Fax: (877) 789-5776e-mail: go@gobklaw.comwebsite: www.gobklaw.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.

I realize it might not make sense since there is no counsel to substitute
but local rule 2091-1(b) says that one may be filed. So why not file one to
make the record clear?
I have yet to see anyone seek to be employed after confirmation of a Plan.
Sincerely,
*Michael Avanesian, Esq. *AVANESIAN LAW FIRM
101 N. Brand Blvd., PH 1920
Glendale, California 91203
Tel: 818.276.2477 Fax: 818.208.4550
*Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
*IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
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 herein.
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Giovanni Orantes go@gobklaw.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> I agreed to represent a corporation in a case in which the former
> counsel's motion to withdraw had already been granted. Since such counsel
> had already withdrawn, it doesn't seem a "substitution of counsel" form
> would make sense since he cannot sign as current counsel because he is no
> longer current counsel. Wouldn't filing a motion and designating myself as
> counsel for the debtor be appearing for the corporation? Is there some
> rule or local rule that requires the filing of some other document before
> the corporation will be deemed to "appear" through me as its attorney in a
> bankruptcy case? I recall arguing in litigation over whether I was
> submitting to the court's jurisdiction simply by showing up for a CMC or
> getting up and talking for the Court without saying I was specially
> appearing and even that would, according to some judges, not be enough to
> consider my act to be the acct to "appear." I specifically remember Judge
> Zurzolo arguing with appearance attorneys that their saying they were
> appearing specially didn't keep their appearance from being a general
> appearance.
>
> I see no Code, Rule or Local Rule that requires an application to
> employment counsel by a postconfirmation case in which there is no longer
> an estate by operation of Section 1141(b) as reiterated in the order
> confirming the plan. I know there is a document entitled "Notice of
> Appearance" that is often filed, but I would file that when I'm not ready
> to file any motions or other pleadings yet. The only citation the court
> makes is to Rule 9011-2(a) that requires corporations to appear through
> counsel, but I thought by filing the motion and designating myself as
> counsel, which placed me on the docket as counsel, I was appearing.
>
> Any clues are appreciated.
>
> --
> Giovanni Orantes, Esq.*
> Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
> 3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 2920
> Los Angeles, CA 90010
> Tel: (213) 389-4362
> Fax: (877) 789-5776
> e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
> website: www.gobklaw.com
>
> **Certified Bankruptcy Specialist, State Bar of California, Board of Legal
> Specialization*
> *Board Certified - Business Bankruptcy Law - American Board of
> Certification
> *Board Certified - Consumer Bankruptcy Law - American Board of
> Certification
> Commercial Litigation
> Estate Planning
> Outside General Counsel
>
> WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
>
> SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
> AND SANTA BARBARA AND THE WORLD FOR CHAPTER 11 AND 15 CASES.
>
> Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
> information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
> the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
> responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
> e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
>
> IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed
> by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
> 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 herein.
>
>
>
I realize it might not make sense since there is no counsel to substitute but local rule 2091-1(b) says that one may be filed. So why not file one to make the record clear?I have yet to see anyone seek to be employed after confirmation of a Plan.ass"gmail_signature">Sincerely,Michael Avanesian, Esq.AVANESIAN
LAW FIRM101
N. Brand Blvd., PH 1920Glendale,
California 91203Tel:
818.276.2477 Fax: 818.208.4550Confidentiality:This electronic transmission and its contents are legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon, 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 herein.
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Giovanni Orantes go@gobklaw.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
I agreed to represent a corporation in a case in which the former counsel's motion to withdraw had already been granted. Since such counsel had already withdrawn, it doesn't seem a "substitution of counsel" form would make sense since he cannot sign as current counsel because he is no longer current counsel. Wouldn't filing a motion and designating myself as counsel for the debtor be appearing for the corporation? Is there some rule or local rule that requires the filing of some other document before the corporation will be deemed to "appear" through me as its attorney in a bankruptcy case? I recall arguing in litigation over whether I was submitting to the court's jurisdiction simply by showing up for a CMC or getting up and talking for the Court without saying I was specially appearing and even that would, according to some judges, not be enough to consider my act to be the acct to "appear." I specifically remember Judge Zurzolo arguing with appearance attorneys that their saying they were appearing specially didn't keep their appearance from being a general appearance.I see no Code, Rule or Local Rule that requires an application to employment counsel by a postconfirmation case in which there is no longer an estate by operation of Section 1141(b) as reiterated in the order confirming the plan. I know there is a document entitled "Notice of Appearance" that is often filed, but I would file that when I'm not ready to file any motions or other pleadings yet. The only citation the court makes is to Rule 9011-2(a) that requires corporations to appear through counsel, but I thought by filing the motion and designating myself as counsel, which placed me on the docket as counsel, I was appearing.Any clues are appreciated.-- Giovanni Orantes, Esq.*Orantes Law Firm, P.C.3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 2920Los Angeles, CA 90010Tel: (213) 389-4362Fax: (877) 789-5776e-mail: go@gobklaw.comwebsite: www.gobklaw.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.

I agreed to represent a corporation in a case in which the former counsel's
motion to withdraw had already been granted. Since such counsel had
already withdrawn, it doesn't seem a "substitution of counsel" form would
make sense since he cannot sign as current counsel because he is no longer
current counsel. Wouldn't filing a motion and designating myself as
counsel for the debtor be appearing for the corporation? Is there some
rule or local rule that requires the filing of some other document before
the corporation will be deemed to "appear" through me as its attorney in a
bankruptcy case? I recall arguing in litigation over whether I was
submitting to the court's jurisdiction simply by showing up for a CMC or
getting up and talking for the Court without saying I was specially
appearing and even that would, according to some judges, not be enough to
consider my act to be the acct to "appear." I specifically remember Judge
Zurzolo arguing with appearance attorneys that their saying they were
appearing specially didn't keep their appearance from being a general
appearance.
I see no Code, Rule or Local Rule that requires an application to
employment counsel by a postconfirmation case in which there is no longer
an estate by operation of Section 1141(b) as reiterated in the order
confirming the plan. I know there is a document entitled "Notice of
Appearance" that is often filed, but I would file that when I'm not ready
to file any motions or other pleadings yet. The only citation the court
makes is to Rule 9011-2(a) that requires corporations to appear through
counsel, but I thought by filing the motion and designating myself as
counsel, which placed me on the docket as counsel, I was appearing.
Any clues are appreciated.
Giovanni Orantes, Esq.*
Orantes Law Firm, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 2920
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: (213) 389-4362
Fax: (877) 789-5776
e-mail: go@gobklaw.com
website: www.gobklaw.com
**Certified Bankruptcy Specialist, State Bar of California, Board of Legal
Specialization*
*Board Certified - Business Bankruptcy Law - American Board of Certification
*Board Certified - Consumer Bankruptcy Law - American Board of Certification
Commercial Litigation
Estate Planning
Outside General Counsel
WE ARE A "DEBT RELIEF AGENCY" AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAW.
SERVING BAKERSFIELD, LOS ANGELES, ORANGE COUNTY, RIVERSIDE, SAN BERNARDINO
AND SANTA BARBARA AND THE WORLD FOR CHAPTER 11 AND 15 CASES.
Note: The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential
information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please immediately notify us by telephone or e-mail and delete the original
e-mail at (213) 389-4362 or (888) 619-8222.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed
by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
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 herein.
I agreed to represent a corporation in a case in which the former counsel's motion to withdraw had already been granted. Since such counsel had already withdrawn, it doesn't seem a "substitution of counsel" form would make sense since he cannot sign as current counsel because he is no longer current counsel. Wouldn't filing a motion and designating myself as counsel for the debtor be appearing for the corporation? Is there some rule or local rule that requires the filing of some other document before the corporation will be deemed to "appear" through me as its attorney in a bankruptcy case? I recall arguing in litigation over whether I was submitting to the court's jurisdiction simply by showing up for a CMC or getting up and talking for the Court without saying I was specially appearing and even that would, according to some judges, not be enough to consider my act to be the acct to "appear." I specifically remember Judge Zurzolo arguing with appearance attorneys that their saying they were appearing specially didn't keep their appearance from being a general appearance.I see no Code, Rule or Local Rule that requires an application to employment counsel by a postconfirmation case in which there is no longer an estate by operation of Section 1141(b) as reiterated in the order confirming the plan. I know there is a document entitled "Notice of Appearance" that is often filed, but I would file that when I'm not ready to file any motions or other pleadings yet. The only citation the court makes is to Rule 9011-2(a) that requires corporations to appear through counsel, but I thought by filing the motion and designating myself as counsel, which placed me on the docket as counsel, I was appearing.>-- Giovanni Orantes, Esq.*Orantes Law Firm, P.C.3435 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 2920Los Angeles, CA 90010Tel: (213) 389-4362Fax: (877) 789-5776e-mail: go@gobklaw.comwebsite: www.gobklaw.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.