Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Attorney’s fees; Bankruptcy attorneys; Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978; Baker Botts v. ASARCO; L.L.C.; Fee applications; Prejudicial treatment; United States Trustee; Bankruptcy Code Section 330; Bankruptcy Code Section 328; Administrative expense; Reasonable fees; Actual and necessary services; Supreme Court; Fee-defense litigation; Frivolous litigation; Quantum meruit; Lodestar Method; Hindsight approach; Hybrid approach; Statutory interpretation; Underlying benefit; Enhanced fees; The American Rule; Fee-shifting; Bad faith exception to the American Rule; Higher standard
Articles 1 - 1 of 1
Full-Text Articles in Law
Bankruptcy: Where Attorneys Can Lose Big Even If They Win Big, Stanislav Veyber
Bankruptcy: Where Attorneys Can Lose Big Even If They Win Big, Stanislav Veyber
Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law
Historically, bankruptcy attorneys received the short end of the stick and were paid less for their services than attorneys in other fields of law. With the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, Congress attempted to reduce the discrepancy in compensation. However, after the Supreme Court’s decision in Baker Botts v. ASARCO; L.L.C., the playing field remains unequal for bankruptcy attorneys. Following this decision, if a debtor disputes their attorney’s fee application, attorneys are at a disadvantage and cannot recover fees for defending their fee application. As a result, bankruptcy attorneys take an effective pay cut if they are faced with a …