Bankr. S.D. Texas cuts bankruptcy fee award, including for vague entries

What happened

The Office of the Attorney General sought fees and expenses under a contract fee clause in the bankruptcy case. Pearl Resources objected. The court sustained the objection in part, finding some entries vague and noting repeat instances of block billing, and reduced the fee request by 30%. The court also reduced the requested expenses by 30% for lack of substantiation. The figures include costs. The court did not state the total hours awarded.

What the court said

The Court considers these entries as vague, and takes issue with the repeat instances of block billing. Accordingly, Pearl’s Objection to Fees is sustained in part, and the OAG Fees are reduced by 30% to $204,968.75.

The Court considers these entries as vague, and takes issue with the repeat instances of block billing. Accordingly, Pearl’s Objection to Fees is sustained in part, and the OAG Fees are reduced by 30% to $204,968.75.

The court also reduced the award for: other.

Why it matters

The ruling shows that a bankruptcy court will apply a percentage cut to a fee request when time entries are vague or block billed, and will separately reduce expenses it finds unsubstantiated, even under a contract fee clause.

How to keep this out of your fee petition

• Name the task, the document or person involved, and the purpose.
• Avoid stock phrases that could describe any day in any matter.
• Keep privileged detail general, but specific enough to show the work.

Cite this ruling

Figures and quotes are taken from the opinion and checked against its text. Spot an error? Email team@legaltime.ai with the case name and we will correct it. Summaries of public court opinions. Not legal advice.