Won Song v. Howard Ehrenberg

Good Law
359 F. App'x 817·359 F. App’x 817·359 Fed. Appx. 817·2009 WL 4913290·2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 27324
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 14, 200908-60011, 08-60013California371 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

In these consolidated appeals, Won Ho Song and Eun Ja Song appeal pro se from the judgment of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”) affirming the bankruptcy court’s order approving $2.5 million in attorney’s fees for services rendered by Sung Bae Park and Shapero, Shapero & Hurst (collectively, “special counsel”) to the chapter 7 trustee. Special counsel cross-appeals from the judgment of the BAP reversing the bankruptcy court’s award of costs. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d). We review de novo the BAP’s judgment, Leavitt v. Soto (In re Leavitt), 171 F.3d 1219, 1222-23 (9th Cir.1999), and we affirm the BAP judgment.

Appeal No. 08-60011

The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by awarding compensation to special counsel because Sung Bae Park’s representation of the trustee was not in violation of bankruptcy law or state professional conduct rules. See Pitrat v. Reimers (In re Reimers), 972 F.2d 1127, 1128 (9th Cir.1992) (“This court will not disturb a bankruptcy court’s award of attorney’s fees absent a finding that the court abused its discretion or erroneously applied the law.”) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted).

The…

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.