Laserfiche WebLink
III. Applicant's December Application Fails To Comply with Fed. R. Bankr. P. <br />2014 <br />27. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2014 states that an employment application should contain the <br />following elements: <br />1. Specific facts showing the necessity of the employment; <br />2. The name of the person to be employed; <br />3. The reasons for the selection; <br />4. The professional services to be rendered; <br />5. Any proposed arrangement for compensation; and <br />6. All of the person's connections with the debtor, creditors, any other party in <br />interest, their respective attorneys and accountants, the United States Trustee, <br />or any person employed in the Office of the United States Trustee. <br />See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2014. <br />28. While there could be a reasonable explanation, the Applicant's Affidavit fails to provide <br />details as to why counsel from Texas is necessary and the reasons for selection. Debtor <br />initially filed the case with Colorado counsel, Kit Bradshaw. It appears that Kit <br />Bradshaw is acting as local counsel for James Jameson who is licensed in Texas. Kit <br />Bradshaw advised the UST Analyst that he intended to have James Jameson substitute <br />him as counsel. <br />29. It is not clear if an agreement exists between Kit Bradshaw and James Jameson. <br />Statement of Financial Affairs #9 shows that Kit Bradshaw received $2500 on August 1, <br />2015 and that James Jameson received $12,000 on August 1, 2015. The Application <br />states that James Jameson applied the amount of $5,687.50 of the retainer from the <br />Debtor for pre-petition services and hat the balance is held in a trust account subject to <br />Court approval. The Application fails to disclose an agreement, if any, regarding the <br />sharing of compensation between Kit Bradshaw and James Jameson, if any. It is the <br />purview of the bankruptcy court to determine the significance of the disclosures required <br />under Rule 2014, as such applicants should make all required disclosures regardless of <br />how innocuous they may seem. In re Tinley Plaza Associates, L.P., 142 B.R. 272, 278 <br />(Bankr. N.D.I11. 1992). <br />30. As stated above, Kit Bradshaw advised the UST Analyst that he intended to have James <br />Jameson substitute him as counsel. This raises concerns since the Applicant in this case <br />is not licensed in the State of Colorado. In In re Pueblo Foods, LLC chapter 11 case, <br />Case No. 14-26635-EEB, Judge Brown granted the amended application to employ an <br />attorney not licensed in the State of Colorado so long as the applicant attorney engaged <br />special counsel pursuant to a separate application to the court. That case involved a <br />foreclosure of Debtor's real property. In Pueblo Foods, although the Applicant was <br />admitted to practice before the Bankruptcy Court and had a Colorado office address, the <br />5 <br />