Legal Opinion
In re Ortiz
United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 20, 2013No. Case No. 13-36177(cgm)PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Chapter 7
MEMORANDUM DECISION ON ATTORNEYS’ RULE 2016(b) STATEMENT
CECELIA G. MORRIS, CHIEF UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE
Introduction
The Court set a hearing in this case to request information regarding the scope of the attorney’s representation, pursuant to his inconsistent Rule 2016(b) Statement as defined below. The Court now finds that debtors’ attorney impermissibly excluded routine matters that are required of every *147attorney representing a consumer debtor in bankruptcy.
Background
Alfred and Maritza Ortiz (“Debtors”) filed a chapter 7 petition on May 22, 2013, through their counsel, the…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- In Re Busy Beaver Building Centers, Inc. Kirkpatrick & LockhartCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- David R. Kittay, Trustee v. Daniel J. Kornstein and Kornstein Veisz & WexlerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- In Re DownsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- Hale v. United States Trustee (In Re Basham)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Jensen v. United States Trustee (In Re Smitty's Truck Stop, Inc.)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Tenth Circuit · 1997
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- In re GorskiUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2014
- In re ScottUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Mississippi · 2015
- In re HallUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. New York · 2014
- In re D'ArataUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2018
- In re BonillaUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2017
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.