Those who lease commercial property may find themselves unwilling participants in complex proceedings before the U.S. bankruptcy courts when a tenant files bankruptcy. Meanwhile, the lease becomes an asset among the "property...more
United States District Court Orders Insured To Produce Certain Pre-Litigation Documents But Not Others Deemed Work Product 99 Wall sued Allied World seeking coverage under a property policy for water losses at 99 Wall’s...more
Just what must be alleged for claims for breach of fiduciary duty to proceed past initial pleadings and into meaningful fact development? In a recent decision, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of...more
Either from our prior posts, or from the great posts from Stone and Baxter’s Plan Proponent blog or from Bracewell’s Basis Points blog, we all know the Supreme Court’s holding in ASARCO: a strict interpretation of Section...more
You may recall the holding and analysis of ASARCO from Jay’s previous post, here. At bottom, ASARCO followed a strict interpretation of Section 330(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, holding that professionals are allowed to charge...more
The Supreme Court’s decision last term in Baker Botts v. Asarco, in which the Court ruled that professionals that are paid from a debtor’s bankruptcy estate cannot be compensated for time spent defending their fee...more
In 2005, ASARCO LLC, a copper mining, smelting and refining company, was in financial trouble and filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Relying on §327(a) and §1107(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, ASARCO retained two law firms to...more
“Our basic point of reference when considering the award of attorney’s fees is the bedrock principle known as the American Rule: Each litigant pays his own attorney’s fees, win or lose, unless a statute or contract provides...more
On June 15, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States made clear that attorneys and other professionals hired under §327(a) of the Bankruptcy Code are not entitled to fees for their time spent litigating a §330(a)(1) fee...more
On June 15, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that a law firm could not recover fees it incurred in defending its own fee application. THE ASARCO CASE - The case involved the copper company ASARCO LLC that filed...more
The Supreme Court has not handled its recent major bankruptcy decisions well. The jurisdictional confusion engendered by its 2011 decision in Stern v. Marshall was only partially clarified by this term’s opinion in Wellness...more
On June 15, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Baker Botts L.L.P. v. ASARCO LLC, No. 14-103, holding that § 330(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code does not permit bankruptcy courts to award fees that § 327(a) professionals incur...more
Lawyers in probate and fiduciary matters, and in bankruptcy and receivership matters, are frequently entitled to seek payment of their fees from a corpus of trust or estate funds. Unlike in employment litigation and civil...more