U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1991

In re Financial Corporation of America, Debtor. Marcy J. Tiffany v. David A. Gill, Chapter 11 Trustee

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided October 7, 1991 · Norris, Thompson, King

946 F.2d 689; 91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8076; 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 23116; 22 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 201; 1991 WL 196979 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Thomas Patrick Tinker, Washington, D.C., for appellant., Richard K. Diamond, Danning, Gill, Gould, Diamond & Spector, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

20 later published cases cite this decision.

In re Silvus (United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia 2005)
Kennedy v. Rams Hill, LLC (In re Borrego Springs Development Corp.) (United States District Court for the Southern District of California 2000)
In re Colburn (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon 1999)
United States Trustee v. Tamm (In re Hokulani Square, Inc.) (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The Ninth Circuit 2011)
In re: Hokulani Square, Inc. (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The Ninth Circuit 2011)
Elder v. Susan Uecker & Official Unsecured Creditors' Committee (In re Elder) (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. California 2005)
In re Pruitt (United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. California 2004)
In re Circle K Corp. (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Arizona 2003)
In re Castorena (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Idaho 2001)
In re Columbia Plastics, Inc. (United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Washington 2000)
In re Hages (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. California 2000)
In re Rodriguez (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado 1999)
Garb v. Marshall (In re Narragansett Clothing Co.) (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The First Circuit 1997)
In re Monus (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio 1997)
Roderick v. Levy (In re Roderick Timber Co.) (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The Ninth Circuit 1995)
In re Dutta (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The Ninth Circuit 1994)
Larson v. United States Trustee (In re Larson) (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The Ninth Circuit 1994)
In re Stewart (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The Ninth Circuit 1993)
Locke v. Walsh (In re Travel Headquarters, Inc.) (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The Ninth Circuit 1992)
National Labor Relations Board v. Walsh (In re Palau Corp.) (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of The Ninth Circuit 1992)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This appeal involves an objection to a Chapter 11 trustee’s final application for compensation. Subject matter jurisdiction lies under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). In re Stanton, 766 F.2d 1283, 1288 (9th Cir. 1985).

A Chapter 11 trustee turned over assets to himself as successor Chapter 7 *690 trustee and requested compensation that required inclusion of the value of the assets turned over to himself in order not to exceed the statutory maximum. The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel held:

The trial court had the discretionary authority to award to the Chapter 11 trustee reasonable compensation based on the Section 330(a) criteria of "the nature, the extent, and the value of [his] services, the time spent to such services, and the cost of comparable services.” In a case that is converted to Chapter 7, the fees to be awarded to the two trustees are independent and the funds turned over to the Chapter 7 trustee are counted in calculating the Section 326(a) maximum on the Chapter 11 trustee’s compensation.

However, the trial court retains discretion to set the Chapter 7 or the Chapter 11 trustee’s fees, subject to the statutory maximum amounts. In the instant case, for' example, if the trial court determines that the value of the Chapter 7 trustee’s services has been limited, the trial court may reduce that award and thus avoid any inappropriate “double-dipping.” In re Fin. Corp. of America, 114 B.R. 221 (9th Cir. BAP 1990) at 226.

We adopt the reasoning and conclusions of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel and affirm the BAP decision and remand this case to the BAP for remand to the bankruptcy court to permit the bankruptcy court to consider the criteria set forth in Section 330(a) of the Bankruptcy Code in setting the Chapter 11 trustee’s fee.

BAP AFFIRMED. Case REMANDED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.