In Re Hungry Horse, LLC

574 B.R. 740 (2017)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P is engaged in oilfield services. P filed chapter 11 on May 17, 2016, and sought to retain Wagner as bankruptcy counsel. P proposed a number of hourly rates for billing professionals, including $275 for Puccini, Jr. The Court approved the application but did not rule on the proposed hourly rates. Puccini left the Wagner firm in May 2017 and was hired by the Gorman firm. On June 16, 2017, the Wagner firm filed a withdrawal and substitution of counsel, and that P would seek to employ the Gorman firm as replacement counsel. P seeks Court approval of a $350 hourly billing rate for Puccini and Gorman. The current hourly rate of Gorman (a tax attorney) for nonbankruptcy work is $350. P also seeks approval, pursuant to § 328(a), of the engagement agreement between it and the Gorman firm, and of the following paragraph in particular: P agrees to pay all reasonable legal fees including dealing with any objections to court approval. The Unsecured Creditor's Committee (UCC) objects because there is no justification for increasing Puccini's hourly rate by $75, Gorman does not have significant experience acting as general bankruptcy counsel for Chapter 11 debtors in possession, and it objects to the fee defense provision arguing it is contrary to the holding of Baker Botts L.L.P. v. ASARCO LLC, 135 S. Ct. 2158, 192 L. Ed. 2d 208 (2015). The agreement with Gorman required P to pay all of the Gorman firm's reasonable attorney fees incurred defending its fee applications.