Honorable Timothy A. Barnes
Chapter 7
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF ORDER AWARDING TO CARLSON DASH, LLC, ATTORNEYS FOR TRUSTEE, FOR ALLOWANCE AND PAYMENT OF SECOND INTERIM COMPENSATION AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES
| TOTAL FEES REQUESTED: |
$ 73,001.00 |
TOTAL COSTS REQUESTED: |
$ 1,030.73 |
| TOTAL FEES REDUCED: |
$ 2,702.30 |
TOTAL COSTS REDUCED: |
$ 0.00 |
| TOTAL FEES ALLOWED: |
$ 70,299.00 |
TOTAL COSTS ALLOWED: |
$ 1,030.73 |
TOTAL FEES AND COSTS ALLOWED: $ 71,
014.43 The attached time and expense entries have been underlined to reflect disallowance in whole or in part. The basis for each disallowance is reflected by numerical notations that appear on the left of each underlined entry. The numerical notations correspond to the enumerated paragraphs below.
(1) Duplication of Services - TOTAL of disallowed amounts: $ 189.00
The Court denies the allowance of compensation for services that duplicate those of another professional or paraprofessional. See 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(4)(A)(i). Reduction in fees is warranted if multiple attorneys from the same firm appear in court on a motion or argument or for a conference, unless counsel adequately demonstrates that each attorney present contributed in some meaningful way. In re Pettibone, 74 B.R. 293, 307 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1987) (Schmetterer, J.) ("A debtor's estate should not bear the burden of duplication of services. If found in the record, such duplication shall be disallowed by the court as unnecessary."). It is also an accepted principle that generally no more than one attorney may bill for time spent in an intra-office conference or meeting absent an adequate explanation. See In re Adventist Living Ctrs., Inc., 137 B.R. 701, 716 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1991) (Sonderby, J.); In re Pettibone, 74 B.R. at 303.
(2) Lumping - TOTAL of disallowed amounts (10% of affected entries): $ 53.30
The Court may impose a ten percent penalty on entries that appear to be "lumping." The Court will reduce each entry marked as such per the penalty. In re Wildman, 72 B.R. 700, 709 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1987) (Schmetterer, J.) ("Applicants may not circumvent the minimum time requirement or any of the requirements of detail by "lumping" a bunch of activities into a single entry. [citation omitted]. Each type of service should be listed with the corresponding specific time allotment."). (3) Insufficient Description - TOTAL of disallowed amounts: $ 2,379.00
The Court denies the allowance of compensation for the indicated task(s) as the description of each task fails to identify in a reasonable manner the service rendered. In re Pettibone, 74 B.R. 293, 301 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1987) (Schmetterer, J.) ("A proper fee application must list each activity, its date, the attorney who performed the work, a description of the nature and substance of the work performed, and the time spent on the work. [Citation omitted] Records which give no explanation of the activities performed are not compensable."); In re Wildman, 72 B.R. 700, 708-9 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1987) (Schmetterer, J.) (same). In this case, counsel often noted a communication with one party but did not note what the communication concerned; therefore, the court was unable to determine the benefit to the estate.
(4) Computational or Typographical Error - TOTAL of disallowed amounts: $ 81.00
The court denies the allowance of compensation for the following tasks because the amount of fees appears to be a computational or typographical error. In this case, there were two charges on the same day for the same counsel attending the same hearing. The court assumes one is a duplicate. Dated: 03 MAY 2016
/s/_________
Timothy A. Barnes
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Image materials not available for display.