In Re Cochran

164 B.R. 366, 7 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 834, 1994 Bankr. LEXIS 194, 1994 WL 59362
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida
DecidedFebruary 23, 1994
DocketBankruptcy 93-00108-6C7, 93-00207-6C7, 93-00335-6C7, 93-00455-6C7 and 93-00604-6C7
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 164 B.R. 366 (In Re Cochran) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Cochran, 164 B.R. 366, 7 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 834, 1994 Bankr. LEXIS 194, 1994 WL 59362 (Fla. 1994).

Opinion

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING REASONABLENESS OF COMPENSATION OF DOCUMENT PREPARATION SERVICES

C. TIMOTHY CORCORAN, III, Bankruptcy Judge.

These Chapter 7 cases came on for a joint, consolidated evidentiary hearing on November 18, 1993, upon motions by the United States trustee to determine reasonableness of fees charged by various document preparation services utilized by the debtors for assistance in preparing each case for filing. The respondents to these motions were document preparation services known as Glenna L. Elkins d/b/a Document Typing Service; Document Preparation, Inc.; People’s Law Service, Inc.; Paralegal Paperworks, Inc.; and, Phoenix Paralegal Services, Inc. Glenna L. Elkins d/b/a Document Typing Service, Document Preparation, Inc. and People’s Law Service, Inc., were represented at the hearing by Howard M. Weiss, Esquire. On August 16, 1993, the court entered defaults against Paralegal Paperworks, Inc., and Phoenix Paralegal Services, Inc., for their failure to appear and defend, and these entities were neither present nor represented at this hearing.

Pursuant to F.R.B.P. 9014 and 7052 and F.R.Civ.P. 52, the court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:

1. The court has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter pursuant to the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq., 28 U.S.C. § 1334, 28 U.S.C. § 157(a), and the standing order of reference entered by the district court. This is a core proceeding within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 157(b).

2. Section 329 of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. § 329, empowers the court to review for reasonableness the compensation paid by debtors to attorneys for representing debtors in bankruptcy cases and for services rendered in connection with bankruptcy cases. If compensation exceeds the reasonable value of the services, the court may, among other things, order the return of any excessive amounts to the estate or to the *368 debtor. F.R.B.P. 2017 provides the procedural mechanism for the court to review the reasonableness of compensation under Section 329. The filing of a motion under F.R.B.P. 2017 creates a contested matter within the meaning of F.R.B.P. 9014.

3. Although Section 329 refers to reviewing the compensation of “attorneys,” this section allows the court to perform the same review of compensation for reasonableness when the persons providing the services to debtors are not attorneys-at-law but are instead non-licensed attorneys operating as document preparation services, typing services, or paralegal services. In re Bachmann, 113 B.R. 769, 774-75 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.1990). See also, e.g., In re Rishel, 149 B.R. 720, 720 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.1993); In re Minchew, 150 B.R. 275, 276 (Bankr.N.D.Fla.1992); In re McCarthy, 149 B.R. 162, 167 (Bankr.S.D.Cal. 1992); Coley v. Farmer (In re Hutchinson), Case No. 90-41382, Adv. No. 90-4175 (Bankr.S.D.Ga. filed March 18, 1991); In re Webster, 120 B.R. 111, 114 (Bankr.E.D.Wisc.1990). On these motions of the United States trustee, therefore, the court is required to review for reasonableness the compensation paid by these debtors to the document preparation services that prepared the petitions, schedules, and statements filed by the debtors in connection with initiating these bankruptcy cases.

4. Documentary evidence introduced by the United States trustee at the hearing established that the fees charged by the respondents in each of the respective cases is as follows:

Debtor Service Fee
Cochran Glenna L. Elkins d/b/a $420 Document Typing Service
Golding Document Preparation, Inc. $375
Brayton People’s Law Service, Inc. $350
Cannon Paralegal Paperworks, Inc. $250
Cromack Phoenix Paralegal $300 Services, Inc.

5. Documentary evidence introduced by the United States trustee also established that the respondents advertised their services, through the use of “yellow page” directories or business cards, using the words “law,” “legal,” “paralegal,” or “legal clinics.”

6. Additional documentary evidence introduced by the United States trustee in the Golding and Brayton eases established that the respondents in those cases were engaged in the practice of law or in advising their customers as to how to prepare the Chapter 7 petition, schedules, and statement of affairs.

7. The respondents did not produce any documentary evidence for the court’s consideration.

8. Appearing pursuant to subpoena served upon her by the United States trustee, Elizabeth Ann Cochran, one of the debtors, testified regarding her experience with Document Typing Service and People’s Law Service, Inc. She testified that she had contacted People’s Law Service, Inc., regarding the filing of a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case and believed all her subsequent dealings were with that company despite the fact the local form “Statement of Assistance” filed in her case indicated that it was Document Typing Service that assisted her in the preparation of her Chapter 7 petition, schedules, and statement of affairs. Ms. Cochran testified that she was initially attracted to People’s Law Service, Inc., by a sign on its building that advertised bankruptcy cases for as low as $88. She testified that she paid a total of $420 in fees for the preparation of her Chapter 7 case and that she spent only between one-half hour to one hour, either in person or over the telephone, with employees of People’s Law Service, Inc., in connection with her case. She also testified that Earl Elkins of-People’s Law Service, Inc., advised her that, after she had made an initial payment of $100 to People’s Law Service, Inc., she could advise her creditors that she had already filed bankruptcy and would not have to fear losing her car through repossession for at least six months. Ms. Cochran testified that, after paying the $100 initial installment, she advised Barnett Bank, which held a security interest in her car, of this and that the bank immediately repossessed her car. Ms. Cochran gave further testimony that employees of People’s Law Service, Inc., advised her to make changes to her schedules or supplied information on the schedules filed with the court without her knowledge.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Alexander
284 B.R. 626 (N.D. Ohio, 2002)
In Re Haney
284 B.R. 841 (N.D. Ohio, 2002)
Meininger v. Burnworth (In re Kaye)
268 B.R. 301 (M.D. Florida, 2001)
In Re Landry
250 B.R. 441 (M.D. Florida, 2000)
In Re Guttierez
248 B.R. 287 (W.D. Texas, 2000)
In Re Burdick
191 B.R. 529 (N.D. New York, 1996)
In Re Cordero
185 B.R. 882 (M.D. Florida, 1995)
In Re Gunn
171 B.R. 517 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
164 B.R. 366, 7 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 834, 1994 Bankr. LEXIS 194, 1994 WL 59362, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-cochran-flmb-1994.