In Re Washington

232 B.R. 814
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida.
DecidedJanuary 4, 1999
Docket19-12867
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 232 B.R. 814 (In Re Washington) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, S.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 Washington, 232 B.R. 814 (Fla. 1999).

Opinion

ORDER ALLOWING COMPENSATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE TO CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE AND BAKST, CLOYD & BAKST, P.A. PURSUANT TO COURT ORDER CONVERTING CASE TO A CHAPTER 13

A. JAY CRISTOL, Chief Judge.

THIS CAUSE came before the Court in Miami, Florida, for hearing on December 2, 1998. The Court heard the proffers, representations and argument of counsel. The record reflects this case was originally filed as a voluntary Chapter 7 proceeding on July 27, 1998. Deborah C. Menotte was appointed as the Chapter 7 Trustee, and the law firm of Bakst, Cloyd & Bakst, P.A. (the Trustee and her attorneys shall collectively be referred to as “Movants”) was authorized to represent her pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 327 and 330. On October 14, 1998, this case was converted to a proceeding under Chapter 13 of the Code pursuant to the Debtors’ Motion to Convert Case. Paragraph 4 of the Court’s Order Converting Case Under Chapter 7 to Case Under Chapter 13 provides for the Chapter 7 Trustee or any other party entitled to compensation for services rendered in a Chapter 7 case to file an application for compensation and reimbursement of expenses within thirty (30) days of the Court’s Order.

The Chapter 7 Trustee served her application for allowance of compensation and administrative expenses on November 5, 1998, seeking the sum of $1,060.00 as compensation as Trustee plus costs of $72.49. Bakst, Cloyd & Bakst, P.A. served and filed their application for compensation wherein they seek fees in the amount of $3,972.01 for fees incurred prior to the date of conversion, plus fees in the amount of $1,650.50 for fees incurred after the date of conversion. They have also sought costs in the amount of $172.51 for total fees and costs requested of $5,622.51. The Trustee has sought compensation at the rate of $100.00 per hour, while Bakst, Cloyd & Bakst, P.A. have sought compensation at the rate of $250.00 per hour as attorneys.

Both of the Movants assert that they are entitled to fees for services in this case and costs incurred as their fiduciary duties required them to investigate the business and financial affairs of the Debtors. The Trustee believed that personal inspection of the Debtors’ assets was especially appropriate in that the Debtors disclosed that they owned two parcels of real property, one being their claimed homestead property and the other being a claimed rental property. The Trustee asserts she personally investigated these properties and discovered that the Debtors were not residing in the claimed homestead proper *816 ty, but instead, the property was inhabited by some proposed purchasers of the home. The Trustee also discovered the Debtors were residing in the claimed rental property, and, while she was there, discovered various undisclosed assets. It is the Trustee’s position that Anthony Washington would not allow her to remain on the property to take' pictures of the various undisclosed assets and required her to leave. It was at this time that the Chapter 7 Trustee sought retention of Bakst, Cloyd & Bakst, P.A. to investigate this matter.

Bakst, Cloyd & Bakst, P.A. proceeded to schedule a Rule 2004 examination duces tecum of the Debtors and began to investigate the various assets of the Debtors. They obtained a copy of the proposed sale contract in which it is disclosed that the Debtors were attempting to sell a large screen television, a riding lawn mower, two chandeliers, and several appliances, none of which were listed or otherwise disclosed on the Debtors’ Schedules or Statement of Financial Affairs.

The Debtors failed to appear at their Rule 2004 examination on October 8, 1998 and the Trustee moved to compel the Debtors to appear and for sanctions. A partial agreed order was entered in regard to that motion, requiring the Debtors to appear for their deposition, but the remainder of the motion is still under advisement before a visiting judge. The Debtors did appear for their Rule 2004 examination on November 13,1998.

The Movants attribute the amount of time and expense incurred in this case to the extreme difficulties they claimed to have encountered by the Debtors’ efforts to thwart the ability of the Chapter 7 Trustee to perform her job. The Movants also assert that post conversion fees and costs are appropriate because the services performed and expenses incurred were to protect the interests of creditors based upon pre-conversion proceedings of the Trustee which had been delayed by the conversion to a Chapter 13, that needed to be completed nonetheless.

Robert Angueira, Esq., of the U.S. Trustee’s office (the “AUST”) appeared at the hearing in support of the Movants’ motions. The AUST supports an award of fees and costs on the grounds of quantum meruit. The AUST’s position is that it is the Debtors’ fault the fees and costs were incurred based upon their failure to cooperate with the Chapter 7 Trustee and their subsequent belief that conversion to a Chapter 13 would alleviate any responsibility for their actions during the Chapter 7 case.

The Movants rely on the case of In re Collins, 210 B.R. 538 (Bankr.N.D.Ohio 1997) to support their request. The bankruptcy court in Collins addressed a similar issue of trustee fees and attorney fees being sought by the Chapter 7 trustee and counsel after a case had been converted to a Chapter 13. The court, citing to other cases which have awarded compensation and reimbursement on the theory of quantum meruit, agreed that such an award is necessary to prevent the unfair treatment of Chapter 7 trustees when the conversion to Chapter 13 is for the purpose of avoiding the consequences of a trustee’s investigation of a case. Collins, 210 B.R. at 540.

The court in Collins found that the trustee’s fees and attorney fees were reasonable and necessary as they provided some benefit to the estate. In turn, such amounts were awarded. This Court agrees with the court in Collins that, even upon a conversion to Chapter 13, Chapter 7 trustees and their attorneys should be entitled to compensation for services rendered which benefit the bankruptcy estate, if those services are reasonable and necessary. The Court finds that the Chapter 7 Trustee and her counsel have expended time on this case which has benefitted the bankruptcy estate. Additionally, because time and expenses were incurred after conversion based upon pre-conversion proceedings brought by the Movants, the *817 post-conversion time and expense is appropriately awarded as well.

The Debtors have opposed the fee applications of the Movants, contending the amount of fees sought by the trustee and the trustee’s counsel are not legally or factually warranted. The Debtors claim they did not fail to cooperate with the Trustee. Mr. Washington, one of the joint debtors, asserts the Trustee was let into the Debtors’ home by one of their children while Mr. Washington was asleep in his bed. He was awakened by the Trustee’s activity and inquired as to her identity. Mr. Washington does not dispute the Trustee identified herself and disclosed her purpose for being on the premises.

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

Related

Rebecca Cummings
D. New Mexico, 2024
In Re Jankowski
382 B.R. 533 (M.D. Florida, 2007)
In Re Pivinski
366 B.R. 285 (D. Delaware, 2007)
In Re Kuhn
337 B.R. 668 (N.D. Indiana, 2006)
In Re Silvus
329 B.R. 193 (E.D. Virginia, 2005)
In re Main Realty & Management, LLC
277 B.R. 1 (D. Connecticut, 2002)
In Re Hages
252 B.R. 789 (N.D. California, 2000)
Taunt v. Barman (In Re Barman)
252 B.R. 403 (E.D. Michigan, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
232 B.R. 814, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-washington-flsb-1999.