Tarbox v. United States Trustee for the Northern District of Texas

405 F.3d 338, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 5282, 2005 WL 737514
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 1, 2005
Docket04-10298
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 405 F.3d 338 (Tarbox v. United States Trustee for the Northern District of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tarbox v. United States Trustee for the Northern District of Texas, 405 F.3d 338, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 5282, 2005 WL 737514 (5th Cir. 2005).

Opinion

DeMOSS, Circuit Judge:

Max Tarbox, a Chapter 7 Trustee (the “Trustee”), filed a final report in a bank *339 ruptcy proceeding in which the Trustee proposed to pay interest on administrative fees and expenses from the date of the filing of the petition, arguing that 11 U.S.C. § 726(a)(5) requires such a result in cases where the estate contains enough assets to redistribute a remainder to the debtor, i.e., a surplus case. The United States Trustee for the Northern District of Texas (the “UST”) objected to the proposed payment, arguing that to allow interest to accrue from the date of the petition permits payment of money from the estate for a claim during a time period when no claim in fact existed. The UST urged, alternatively, that interest should accrue from the date the bankruptcy court awards compensation to the trustee. The bankruptcy court followed a third path in determining that the relevant statute denies interest on administrative fees and expenses altogether. The Trustee appealed the decision to the district court, which affirmed the finding of the bankruptcy court essentially for the reasons stated by the bankruptcy court. The Trustee timely filed the instant appeal. For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM.

BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Willadeen Reed, the debtor, filed a petition for relief under Chapter 7 in May 1999. Tarbox was subsequently appointed trustee of the bankruptcy estate. The Trustee secured approximately $42,700 in the debtor’s estate for distribution to the creditors of record. After paying off the creditors, the debtor’s estate contained a surplus of approximately $10,700. The Trustee thereafter submitted to the bankruptcy court an Application for Compensation and Report of Proposed Distribution (the “Final Report”), in which the Trustee proposed to pay interest on administrative claims that the Trustee argued are mandated in surplus cases by § 726(a)(5). 1 The UST objected to the Final Report, essentially arguing that the Trustee was seeking to claim interest for work during a period of time that no work was being performed. The UST contended the Trustee did not earn any monies that could, in turn, earn interest between the date the petition is filed and the date the Trustee actually is awarded his fees, and therefore, the Trustee should not be allowed to claim interest on his fees during that time. The only allowable interest, argued the UST, is calculated from the time the compensation award is determined and the time it takes to pay that award.

The bankruptcy court conducted a hearing during which both parties presented their respective arguments. In May 2003, the bankruptcy court issued a memorandum opinion in which the Trustee and his professionals were awarded compensation under 11 U.S.C. § 330(a), authorized under 11 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2). The bankruptcy court further concluded, however, that the Trustee was not entitled to any interest under § 726(a)(5). In its memorandum order, the bankruptcy court cited a “majority view,” which holds that a strict application of § 726(a)(1) disallows the accrual of interest on fees for services which have yet to be performed; instead, the interest on the trustee’s fees accrues from the date of the award. 2 The bankruptcy *340 court also noted the “minority view,” which compels a strict application of the plain language of the applicable statutory provisions. The minority view holds that § 726(a)(1) simply means what it says: interest must be paid on the trustee’s compensation and expenses from the date of the filing of the petition.

After discussing both views, the bankruptcy court concluded that it could not fully agree with either position and instead developed a third view, which holds that § 726(a)(1) precludes the recovery of interest on administrative fees and expenses altogether. Specifically, the bankruptcy court determined that interest under § 726(a)(1) was only recoverable for creditors who submitted claims against the estate — not by administrators of the estate who are awarded compensation and fees for their work in settling the bankruptcy estate. The district court agreed, affirming the decision of the bankruptcy court on appeal. The district court determined that interest is not payable on administrative claims that arise during pendency of a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case for which no proof of claim is filed, even though a surplus exists. The Trustee timely filed the instant appeal.

DISCUSSION

Whether the district court erred in determining that 11 U.S.C. § 726(a)(1) precludes the recovery of interest for administrative fees and expenses.

We review de novo the district court’s statutory interpretation of 11 U.S.C. § 726(a). See United States v. Phillips, 303 F.3d 548, 550 (5th Cir.2002).

As a preliminary matter, it should be noted that the application of § 726(a)(5) arises only in cases where there are assets remaining in the debtor’s estate after all appropriate distributions have been made under § 726(a)(l)-(4). See In re Vogt, 250 B.R. 250, 266 (Bankr.M.D.La.2000).

Section 726(a)(5) specifically provides that “property of the estate shall be distributed ... in payment of interest at the legal rate from the date of the filing of the petition, on any claim paid under paragraph (1).” 11 U.S.C. § 726(a)(5). Paragraph (a)(1) gives priority to the “payment of claims of the kind specified in ... section 507 of this title, proof of which is timely filed under section 501.” Id. § 726(a)(1), (a)(2)(A). Section 507, in turn, refers to administrative expenses under § 503(b). Id. § 507(a)(1). Section 503(b) allows administrative expenses for “compensation and reimbursement awarded under section 330(a) of this title.” Id. § 503(b)(2). Finally, § 330(a) provides that “the court may award to a trustee, an examiner, a professional person ... reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services rendered ... and reimbursement for actual, necessary expenses.” 3 Id. § 330(a)(l)(A)-(B).

In a case of first impression in this Circuit, the precise issue we are faced with is whether § 726(a)(5) entitles a trustee to interest on his compensation and reimbursement award, and if so, at what point such interest begins to accrue. To better understand the nature of the controversy, we begin with a survey of the case law that has developed in this area.

*341 A. The Majority View

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

Related

Henderson v. US Trustee
Fifth Circuit, 2026
In Re Polly
392 B.R. 236 (N.D. Texas, 2008)
Clippard v. Crocker
384 B.R. 484 (M.D. Tennessee, 2008)
State of Texas v. USA
Fifth Circuit, 2007
Texas v. United States
497 F.3d 491 (Fifth Circuit, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
405 F.3d 338, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 5282, 2005 WL 737514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tarbox-v-united-states-trustee-for-the-northern-district-of-texas-ca5-2005.