Opinion
Case No. 15bk16173
10-15-2015
In re: ARMANDO ORTIZ ERICKA ORTIZ Debtor.
Chapter 13
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF ORDER AWARDING TO DALE A. RILEY, ATTORNEY FOR DEBTORS, FOR ALLOWANCE AND PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES
| TOTAL FEES REQUESTED: | $ 7,236.25 | TOTAL COSTS REQUESTED: | $ 0.00 |
| TOTAL FEES REDUCED: | $ 3,180.33 | TOTAL COSTS REDUCED: | $ 0.00 |
| TOTAL FEES ALLOWED: | $ 4,055.92 | TOTAL COSTS ALLOWED: | $ 0.00 |
(1) Lumping - TOTAL of disallowed amounts (10% of affected entries): $ 43.70
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"). (2) Insufficient Description - TOTAL of disallowed amounts: $ 2,724.00
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).
(3) Computational or Typographical Error - TOTAL of disallowed amounts: $ 17.00
The court denies the allowance of compensation for the following tasks because the amount of fees appears to be a computational or typographical error. Also, where there are two identical entries (same day, same tasks, same time billed), the court will consider one of the entries to be a typographical error.
(4) Improper Time Increments for Billing - TOTAL of disallowed amounts (10% of affected entries): $ 47.13
The court may impose a ten percent penalty for using improper time increments for billing. "Professional persons . . . cannot, in all honesty and reasonableness, charge their clients for increments in excess of one-tenth of an hour." In re Wildman, 72 B.R. 700, 726 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1987) (Schmetterer, J.). This penalty will be imposed where time increments larger than one-tenth of an hour are being used. For example, applicants who bill time using quarter-hour increments risk the ten percent penalty.
(5) Unreasonable Time - TOTAL of disallowed amounts: $ 348.50
The Court denies the allowance in part of compensation for the indicated task(s) since the professional or paraprofessional expended an unreasonable amount of time on the task(s) in light of the nature of the task(s), the experience and knowledge of the professional performing the task(s), and the amount of time previously expended by the professional or another on the task(s). In re Pettibone, 74 B.R. 293, 306 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1987) (Schmetterer, J.) ("The Court will determine what is the reasonable amount of time an attorney should have to spend on a given project... An attorney should not be rewarded for inefficiency. Similarly, attorneys will not be fully compensated for spending an unreasonable number of hours on activities of little benefit to the estate."); In re Wildman, 72 B.R. 700, 713 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1987) (Schmetterer, J.) (same).
In this case there were repeated entries for tasks already done or repeatedly done at excessive time for each entry. One entry for checking the Chapter 13 Trustee's website was entered at 0.1 hours so all entries were reduced to same. Any further time is excessive to check a website. Dated: October 15, 2015
/s/_________
Timothy A. Barnes
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Image materials not available for display.