Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney's Association

I just was just exposed to the differing views of 3 different judges on
that issue. One says that no employment app is needed (MB), when dealing
with an individual debtor, another one didn't even blink at the issue when
I subbed in (VK) and the third one seemed to agree with me that none was
needed, but required a notice of appearance and I filed a statement re
disinterestedness to be on the safe side (DS). Note that the Code and the
local rules when discussing employment talk about the "Debtor" and the
definitions do not differentiate between a Debtor and a Reorganized Debtor,
which does not clarify the matter. To me, the important inquiry is whether
you are seeking compensation from the estate, but since there is no estate
anymore as upon confirmation the estate's assets are, according to most
plans, "re-vested" in the reorganized debtor (though it doesn't make sense
that the property is re-vested in the reorganized debtor when it was never
vested in the reorganized debtor before because the reorganized debtor did
not exist until plan confirmation), I think it is clear that you are not
seeking compensation from the estate. In one of my cases, once I sought to
modify the plan, it made more sense to file an employment application even
if it states that my position is that it is unnecessary.
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.
I just was just exposed to the differing views of 3 different judges on that issue. One says that no employment app is needed (MB), when dealing with an individual debtor, another one didn't even blink at the issue when I subbed in (VK) and the third one seemed to agree with me that none was needed, but required a notice of appearance and I filed a statement re disinterestedness to be on the safe side (DS). Note that the Code and the local rules when discussing employment talk about the "Debtor" and the definitions do not differentiate between a Debtor and a Reorganized Debtor, which does not clarify the matter. To me, the important inquiry is whether you are seeking compensation from the estate, but since there is no estate anymore as upon confirmation the estate's assets are, according to most plans, "re-vested" in the reorganized debtor (though it doesn't make sense that the property is re-vested in the reorganized debtor when it was never vested in the reorganized debtor before because the reorganized debtor did not exist until plan confirmation), I think it is clear that you are not seeking compensation from the estate. In one of my cases, once I sought to modify the plan, it made more sense to file an employment application even if it states that my position is that it is unnecessary.-- 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*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 CertificationCommercial LitigationEstate PlanningOutside General Counsel
The post was migrated from Yahoo.

Reply-To: "Larry Gmail"
X-Original-Return-Path: "Larry Gmail"
To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: groups-system
Question; if you sub in on a chapter 11 case after plan confirmation do you
need to file a motion for employment?
Clearly prior to confirmation the DIP is required by s1107(a) and s327(a) to
obtain court approval to employ professionals, which would include new
attorneys, cpa's etc. The local form F2091-1.substitution.atty cautions
compliance with LBR2014-1; which refers to LBR2091-1 that clearly states
that employment under 327 is not approved merely by filing a consensual
stipulation.
The estate vests with the debtor at confirmation [s1141(b)] The DIP becomes
a reorganized debtor, so the employer is the reorganized debtor, not the
DIP. Post-confirmation, the debtor is no longer debtor in possession
therefore s1107(a) and s327(a) do not apply; therefore I conclude means no
motion for employment is required post confirmation.
Does anyone have a different view?
Best regards
Larry Webb
California Board of Legal Specialization
Certified Specialist in Bankruptcy Law
State Bar of California 229344
Central District California
"A Debt Relief Agency"
Check out my Blog
Webblaw@gmail.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
Law Office Larry Webb Bankruptcy Attorney
The following notice is required by the United States Supreme Court's
interpretation of 11 U.S.C. 101(12A): The Law Offices of Larry Webb is a
Bankruptcy Attorney Debt Relief Agency as defined by 11 U.S.C. 101(12A) of
the Bankruptcy Code. We help people file for relief under the Bankruptcy
code. Bankruptcy is a Federal Court Proceeding that supersedes State Court
Civil Litigation

The post was migrated from Yahoo.