Michael L. Blumenthal v. Richard Myers
This text of 397 F. App'x 258 (Michael L. Blumenthal v. Richard Myers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
After the trustee of the bankruptcy estates of M&M Marketing L.L.C. and Premier Fighting, L.L.C. employed counsel to assist him in connection with the estates, creditor Michael L. Blumenthal moved to disqualify counsel based on a conflict of interest. The bankruptcy court denied the motion but the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) reversed, and this appeal followed. Following careful review, we agree with the BAP that the trustee’s attempt to justify the employment by arguing that counsel was employed for a special purpose fails: 11 U.S.C. § 327(e) governs special-purpose representation, and that statute is inapposite here, where counsel did *259 not previously represent the debtors. We agree further that counsel held an interest adverse to the estates, because he was also serving as attorney for several creditors who held interests adverse to the estates. See In re Vote, 276 F.3d 1024, 1026 (8th Cir.2002); United Artists Theatre Co. v. Walton, 315 F.3d 217, 225 (3d Cir.2003). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
397 F. App'x 258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-l-blumenthal-v-richard-myers-ca8-2010.