In Re Hessinger & Associates

Good Law
1996 WL 33979·192 B.R. 211·1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1005
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 22, 1996C-94-3969-VRW, C-94-3736-VRW and C-94-3981-VRWCalifornia7,392 words

Opinion

Opinion

Walker, J.

ORDER.

On December 29, 1993, appellant law firm Hessinger & Associates (“appellant,” “the firm,” or “Hessinger”) filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition on behalf of Deborah Anne Sogge (“the Sogge ease”). On January 14,1994, appellant filed a Chapter 7 petition on behalf of Mark E. Elección (“the Elección case”). Both of these cases came before Bankruptcy Judge Alan Jaroslovsky. The cases proceeded more or less normally until March 10,1994, when appellee United States Trustee filed a petition with Judge Jaroslov-sky seeking review of appellant’s fees in these cases. A hearing on the appropriateness of appellant’s fees was held on April 15, 1994, and Judge Jaroslovsky was so troubled by what he perceived as overpriced, incompetent and unethical legal practices by appellant that three days later he sua sponte ordered the opening of a miscellaneous case designed to investigate and potentially discipline appellant (“the Miscellaneous case”).

The day after the Miscellaneous ease was opened, Judge Jaroslovsky entered an order in that case which held dischargeable the retainer agreements entered into by appellant and its clients under which those clients were required to make…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.