Professional Compensation/Fees

This expert panel will discuss different approaches to business development, including lawyer advertising, law firm websites, social media, beauty contests and wining and dining, and factors that may influence the effectiveness of various approaches. Examples will be used to illustrate business-development methods and explain how the Model Rules of Professional Conduct apply to the methods being discussed.

Does an approved fee application shelter counsel from malpractice claims brought by the client? If it does, how do you advise your client about how the application and its approval affects a client’s future claim against you? Does asking for it to be paid pit you against your client and create an unavoidable conflict of interest? Get the tools to navigate these murky ethical considerations.

Does an approved fee application shelter counsel from malpractice claims brought by the client? If it does, how do you advise your client about how the application and its approval affects a client’s future claim against you? Does asking for it to be paid pit you against your client and create an unavoidable conflict of interest? Get the tools to navigate these murky ethical considerations.

This is a subject none of us can afford to ignore: the ins and outs of being retained and paid by the bankruptcy estate. Panelists will discuss recent issues and developments in the area of professional retention and compensation, including a look at the U.S. Trustee Guidelines in practice, recent conflict-of-interest decisions and thoughts on best practices.

Equal Monthly Payments; Consequences of Surrender and Pay Direct; Rule 3001(c) issues; Fee-Shifting under Rule 3002.1; Circuit Splits on Service of Objections to Claims and Bar Dates for Secured Creditors; Unscheduled Claims

Resolved: A “workaround” contract provision is enforceable after Baker Botts v. ASARCO. Resolved: If a mortgage includes a security interest in a mortgage escrow account, the mortgage loan can be modified under § 1322. Resolved: Section 1129(a) requires an impaired accepting class for each debtor.

This topic will focus on minefield issues for attorneys in chapter 13 who wish to get paid for their work pre- and post-confirmation. How does Harris v. Viegelahnapply? What happens if a chapter 13 case is converted after there is an outstanding fee award? What if a chapter 13 case is dismissed after an outstanding fee award? Can a debtor’s attorney preemptively contract to deal with Harris issues in the original retention agreement signed pre-petition? How does a debtor’s attorney get paid for work performed during the home stretch under a chapter 13 plan when there are no additional funds to be put into the plan to pay for those services? Can the attorney fees survive discharge? Does § 1328 apply to an attorney fee that was incurred for services rendered post-confirmation? What if the debtor’s attorney provides post-discharge services? How does Baker Botts affect a debtor’s attorney in dealing with fee objections?

This panel will address a variety of current issues including “disinterestedness” and “the 1% Rule,” attempted workarounds in the aftermath of Baker Botts v. ASARCO LLC and other ethical challenges, along with guidance under various applicable Rules of Professional Conduct, such as rules regarding fees (RPC 1.5), confidentiality (RPC 1.6), conflicts of interest (RPC 1.7) and candor with the court (RPC 3.3).

This panel will feature a roundtable discussion with bankruptcy judges from the Ninth Circuit and across the country. The judges will share their thoughts and perspectives, as well as take questions from the audience, on topics of current interest in both business and consumer cases.