In Re Schriock Construction, Inc.

210 B.R. 348, 1997 Bankr. LEXIS 1080, 1997 WL 405900
United States Bankruptcy Court, D. North Dakota·Decided March 31, 1997·No. 19-30168·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

ORDER

WILLIAM A. HILL, Bankruptcy Judge.

By decision entered January 8, 1997, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed this court’s decision which denied First Western Bank and Trust’s (Bank) application for reimbursement of its attorney’s fees and expenses pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 506(b). The circuit court determined that the security agreement between the Bank and Debtor, Schriock Construction, Inc. (Schriock) did provide for recoupment of attorney’s fees in bankruptcy proceedings, North Dakota law notwithstanding. The case was remanded for an award of a reasonable fee.

By Application filed September 2,1994, the Bank as an over-secured creditor sought to recover from the sale of its collateral fees and expenses in the aggregate amount of $38,052.63 as detailed in the Application itself.

*350 The law firm of Olson, Bums, Lee & Larson represented the Bank in connection with Schriock’s financial difficulties for the period April 30, 1993, through August 24, 1994, at rates varying from $135 per hour for Richard P. Olson to $50 per hour for Adrienne Blocker. The total number of hours expended according to the detailed billing statement was 269.45 hours.

Section 506(b) allows to the holder of an over-secured claim any “reasonable fees,” costs or charges provided for under the agreement. The trustee objected to the amount requested on the grounds that they were not reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances of the ease. The overriding circumstance pointed to by the trustee is the Bank’s greatly over-secured status 1 and, the outcome of the ease as it pertained to the Bank resulted from this over-secured status rather than from anything its attorneys did. Citing In re Foertsch, 167 B.R. 555 (Bankr. D.N.D.1994), Attorney Olson argued that full reimbursement in the amount prayed for is justified given the complexity of the case, his skill, and the result achieved. The result achieved is the fact that the Bank realized full satisfaction of its debt- a result which the trustee charges was virtually assured from the beginning.

In Foertsch, supra, this court said that the “reasonableness” requirement operates as a limitation upon the amount of attorney’s fees a court may award an over-secured creditor under § 506(b). In Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 103 S.Ct. 1933, 76 L.Ed.2d 40 (1983), the Supreme Court established that in fee-shifting cases the starting point for determining a reasonable fee is the “lodestar” method- the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate. Courts are in agreement that an attorney’s customary billing rate is the proper starting point, assuming it is not sharply at odds with the prevailing market rate. See, e.g., Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 104 S.Ct. 1541, 79 L.Ed.2d 891 (1984); Islamic Ctr. of Miss. v. Starkville Miss., 876 F.2d 465, 469 (5th Cir.1989).

The firm of Olson, Burns, Lee & Larson has an established reputation as an experienced commercial law firm with an expertise in bankruptcy. The hourly rates charged by Attorney Olson and others in his firm engaged in representing the Bank conform to the usual rates customarily charged for similar legal work in North Dakota and the court is satisfied that the hourly rates charged are reasonable.

Whether the 269.45 hours billed were reasonably expended is a more difficult assessment. It is assumed by the courts that attorneys, preparatory to submitting a fee application, will have already exercised billing judgment by excluding from the calculation hours not reasonably expended, including excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary work. Hensley, at 434, 103 S.Ct. at 1939-40. The trustee argues that the bulk of the work done was redundant because of the Bank’s grossly over-secured position.

This case began as a Chapter 11 reorganization with a Petition filed on April 30, 1993, by Schriock Construction, Inc., a company engaged in the heavy highway construction business including the crashing, hauling and laying of aggregate on highway projects. In carrying out this business Schriock used numerous pieces of heavy equipment-some held under equipment leases and some under purchase arrangements worth approximately 2.3 million dollars as of July 1992-a value that had eroded to 1.6 million dollars by August 1993. The Bank had a security interest in the bulk of the various items of equipment and although an equity cushion did exist, the margin was being rapidly eroded due to age, use and normal depreciation. Schriock remained in Chapter 11 until May 20, 1994, when the court, upon motion by the official creditors committee, directed its conversion to Chapter 7. The case was complex and while in Chapter 11 several plans as well as disclosure statements were proffered. The docket sheet alone is 90 pages in length and its examination reveals a case replete with *351 many contested issues concerning the nature, existence and location of various items of equipment including that pledged to the Bank as security.

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

In Re Schriock Construction, Inc., 210 B.R. 348, 1997 Bankr. LEXIS 1080, 1997 WL 405900 (N.D. 1997).

210 B.R. 348 (In Re Schriock Construction, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Sundale, Ltd.
483 B.R. 23 (S.D. Florida, 2012)
In Re Reorganized Lake Diamond Associates, LLC
367 B.R. 858 (M.D. Florida, 2007)
In Re McKenna
362 B.R. 852 (N.D. Ohio, 2006)
White v. Coors Distributing Co. (In Re White)
260 B.R. 870 (Eighth Circuit, 2001)