Law Offices of Halperin v. Occidental Financial Group, Inc. (In re Occidental Financial Group, Inc.)

Good Law
40 F.3d 1059·94 Daily Journal DAR 16630·32 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 515·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 33313·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8922
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 25, 1994No. 92-56002California1,487 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

We affirm a bankruptcy court disgorgement order directed to an attorney.

I. FACTS

On April 25,1991, John and William Decker retained The Law Offices of Ivan Halperin to represent themselves and several firms they controlled. The purpose of Halperin’s representation of the Deckers, as stated.in their retainer agreement, was:

The clients advanced $140,000 to Mr. Halpe-rin in accordance with the retainer agreement.

On May 30, Mr. Halperin filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions for two of the Deckers’ firms, the Occidental partnership and corporation. He did not at that time file an application for his law offices to be employed by the debtors in bankruptcy. Mr. Halperin did not file the application for retroactive employment until January 9, 1992, over seven months after filing for bankruptcy.

The application included the conflict of interest statement required by Bankruptcy Rule 2014(a). Under penalty of perjury, Halperin declared:

(E.R. 36-37)

This statement was not correct. Mr. Halperin had represented and still represented the Deckers. The Deckers had substantial creditors’ claims against their Occidental firms, and as officers, directors, and partners, could conceivably…

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.