Committee Hosts ASM Meeting With Ethics, Mass Torts Committees

On April 17, 2004, the Professional Compensation Committee conducted a joint educational program with the Ethics and Mass Torts Committees. This was the first tri-committee meeting at ABI that encompassed back-to-back time slots. Short business meetings for each committee followed the program. The program consisted of a panel discussion of a variety of substantive, compensation and ethics issues in mass tort cases, some of which are peculiar to these types of cases. We were fortunate to have three experienced panelists, each of whom has had intensive exposure to the issues in these types of cases.

The panelists included: Hon. Leslie J. Tchaikovsky, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge for the Northern District of California; Theodore L. Freedman, Kirkland & Ellis, New York; and Robert M. Fishman, Shaw, Gussis, Fishman, Glantz & Wolfson LLC, Chicago. The panel discussion was moderated by Richard P. Carmody, Adams and Reese/Lange Simpson LLP of Birmingham, Ala. Also participating were the committee co-chairs: Richard Meth, Pitney, Hardin LLP of Morristown, N.J. (Ethics); and James D. Sweet, Murphy & Desmond of Madison, Wis. and Chip Bowles Jr., Greenebaum, Doll & McDonald PLLC of Louisville, Ky. (Professional Compensation). Ted Freedman is one of the co-chairs of the Mass Torts Committee. Unfortunately, Hon. Judith K. Fitzgerald, Chief Bankruptcy Judge for the Western District of Pennsylvania, was unable to attend because of family illness (though she was instrumental in planning the program).

To read full story, click here

Who Made these Rules Anyway?*
Practical, Legal and Strategic Considerations for Retention and Compensation

Its Jore Burden: Jore Working For Free If You Don't Fully Disclosure Under Bankruptcy Rule 2014

by: Robert M. Fishman
Shaw Gussis Fishman Glantz Wolfson & Towbin LLC; Chicago

The glory days when a debtor’s application for retention of its chosen professionals was automatically rubber stamped by the court appear to have come to an end. A new trend seems to be emerging in the bankruptcy courts (although the retention requirements and applicable disclosures are not new) as these courts begin to look more and more closely at the connections professionals have with other parties in interest in the case. Courts seem increasingly willing to disqualify professionals who represent other parties in interest, even on unrelated matters, or who fail to adequately disclose all their connections. The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Montana became the latest bankruptcy court to jump on this bandwagon when it recently handed down a ruling dealing harshly with a debtor’s professionals that were found to have violated the disclosure standards for professionals that is embodied in Rule 2014 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the “Bankruptcy Rules”). To read full article, click here

In re Jore Corporation (Banker. D. Mont. 2003)

Sidney P. Levinson — Moderator
Hennigan, Bennett & Dorman LLP; Los Angeles
Can Bankruptcy Lawyers Change Higher Billing Rates Than Their Non-Bankruptcy Counterparts?

Hon. Robert J. Faris
U.S. Bankruptcy Court; Honolulu
What Is A Poor Debtor's Attorney To Do? (Getting Paid After Lamie)

*Presented at the Hawaii Bankruptcy Workshop, June, 2004

Committee Seeks Article Submissions, Panelists

The committee solicits all ABI members to submit short articles (500-1,000 words) for publication in the committee’s e-newsletter. If you would like to submit an article, please contact Chip Bowles or Jim Sweet. The committee is also looking for members who would like to participate in panel presentations.