In Re Kaplan

D. Rhode Island

In Re Kaplan

59 B.R. 112, 1986 Bankr. LEXIS 6505

CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Rhode Island

DecidedMarch 14, 1986

DocketBankruptcy 8400619

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 59 B.R. 112 (In Re Kaplan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re Kaplan, 59 B.R. 112, 1986 Bankr. LEXIS 6505 (R.I. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER SETTING FEES AND APPORTIONING LIABILITY THEREFOR

ARTHUR N. VOTOLATO, Jr., Bankruptcy Judge.

Heard on the supplemental application for compensation filed by debtor’s counsel, David Yavner, Esq., of the firm of Pearl-man & Vogel, wherein Mr. Yavner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $8,032.50.

Although the time expended (94.5 hours), and the hourly rate charged ($85.00) are reasonable, we find that, at most, 30% of the services for which compensation is sought were rendered on behalf of the estate, and that the balance of said services were performed for and inured to the benefit of Barry Kaplan, personally. To reiterate, counsel has been very diligent and effective in his handling of this case, and he has rendered services worth at least the amount requested. It is equally clear, however, that most of Mr. Yavner’s effort was of benefit only to Mr. Kaplan, whose interests were, in all respects, adverse to that of creditors. 1 See 11 U.S.C. § 330. See also In re Zweig, 35 B.R. 37 (Bankr.N. *113 D.Ga.1983) (debtor’s attorney entitled to compensation from estate for work performed which produced benefit to estate, but not for items which were of a more personal nature to debtor).

Accordingly, the application is allowed in the amount of $8,032.50, of which $2,409.75 is payable out of this estate. The balance of $5,622.75 is owed by Mr. Kaplan to Mr. Yavner.

1

. Debtor’s counsel and the trustee agreed at the hearing that general creditors would not receive a dividend.

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

ORDER SETTING FEES AND APPORTIONING LIABILITY THEREFOR

ARTHUR N. VOTOLATO, Jr., Bankruptcy Judge.

Heard on the supplemental application for compensation filed by debtor’s counsel, David Yavner, Esq., of the firm of Pearl-man & Vogel, wherein Mr. Yavner requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of $8,032.50.

Although the time expended (94.5 hours), and the hourly rate charged ($85.00) are reasonable, we find that, at most, 30% of the services for which compensation is sought were rendered on behalf of the estate, and that the balance of said services were performed for and inured to the benefit of Barry Kaplan, personally. To reiterate, counsel has been very diligent and effective in his handling of this case, and he has rendered services worth at least the amount requested. It is equally clear, however, that most of Mr. Yavner’s effort was of benefit only to Mr. Kaplan, whose interests were, in all respects, adverse to that of creditors. 1 See 11 U.S.C. § 330. See also In re Zweig, 35 B.R. 37 (Bankr.N. *113 D.Ga.1983) (debtor’s attorney entitled to compensation from estate for work performed which produced benefit to estate, but not for items which were of a more personal nature to debtor).

Accordingly, the application is allowed in the amount of $8,032.50, of which $2,409.75 is payable out of this estate. The balance of $5,622.75 is owed by Mr. Kaplan to Mr. Yavner.

1

. Debtor’s counsel and the trustee agreed at the hearing that general creditors would not receive a dividend.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 B.R. 112, 1986 Bankr. LEXIS 6505, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-kaplan-rib-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack