Ben Dalodado Cadalin and Lorie Montemayor Cadalin

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1The documents filed on May 2, 2005 did not include a
petition. 	A petition was not filed until the next day.
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
In re 	No. 05-42310 TG
Chapter 13
BEN D. CADALIN, LORIE M.
CADALIN,
Debtors.
___________________________/
MEMORANDUM RE APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL ATTORNEYS’ FEES
The 	application 	of 	Eleanor 	Tumaneng 	Angeles 	(“Angeles”), 	the
attorney for the above-captioned chapter 13 debtors, for additional
fees came on for hearing on October 6, 2006. 	Angeles appeared on her
own behalf. 	No one else appeared. 	At the conclusion of the hearing,
the Court advised Angeles that her application would be denied with
prejudice. 	The reasons for the Court’s decision are set forth below.
This 	case 	was 	commenced 	on 	May 	2 	or 	3, 	2005.1 	Bankruptcy
schedules, 	a 	statement 	of 	financial 	affairs, 	and 	a 	chapter 	13 	plan
were filed on May 17, 2005. 	Included in this filing was a Rights and
Responsibilities 	of 	Chapter 	13 	Debtors 	and 	Their 	Attorneys 	(the
Signed: October 06, 2006
________________________________________
LESLIE TCHAIKOVSKY
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge
________________________________________
Entered on Docket
October 06, 2006
GLORIA L. FRANKLIN, CLERK
U.S BANKRUPTCY COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case: 05-42310 Doc# 43 Filed: 10/06/06 Entered: 10/06/06 14:53:04 Page 1 of 8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2It does not appear that Angeles ever obtained an order
approving her fees. 	On February 18, 2006, she filed a certificate
of service of an order approving fees. 	However, presumably, the
order served was a proposed form of order since the docket does not
reflect the entry of an order approving her fees.
3An amended order confirming this plan was filed on June 12,
2006. 	The only amendment appears to be the specification of the
amount of the monthly plan payment.
2
“Rights and Responsibilities”). 	An amended plan was filed two days
later, on May 19, 2005.
On 	May 	24, 	2005, 	Angeles 	filed 	an 	application 	for 	approval 	of
$1,800 	in 	fees, 	$1,000 	of 	which 	she 	had 	already 	received 	as 	a 	pre-
petition retainer and $800 to be received through the plan. 	She also
disclosed receipt pre-petition of the $194 filing fee. 	The filing
of 	this 	application 	was 	unnecessary. 	The 	applicable 	procedures 	in
this district provide that, if a Rights and Responsibilities is filed
and 	the 	requested 	fee 	does 	not 	exceed 	an 	amount 	specified 	by 	the
court, the fees are presumptively approved, and no application need
be 	filed. 	The 	fee 	agreed 	upon 	by 	Angeles 	did 	not 	exceed 	the
specified amount. 2
A meeting of creditors was conducted and concluded on June 23,
2005. 	No party in interest appears to have objected to the amended
plan 	and 	the 	chapter 	13 	trustee 	appears 	to 	have 	found 	the 	amended
plan 	consistent 	with 	the 	Court’s 	and 	the 	Bankruptcy 	Code’s
requirements. 	As 	a 	result, 	the 	amended 	plan 	was 	not 	placed 	on 	the
contested 	calendar 	and 	was 	confirmed 	on 	June 	30, 	2005 	without 	a
hearing being conducted. 3
Case: 05-42310 Doc# 43 Filed: 10/06/06 Entered: 10/06/06 14:53:04 Page 2 of 8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3
On 	July 	25, 	2005, 	a 	secured 	creditor, 	Chase 	Home 	Finance, 	LLC
(“Chase”) 	filed 	a 	motion 	for 	relief 	from 	the 	automatic 	stay. 	A
hearing was scheduled for August 12, 2005. 	On August 12, 2005, the
attorney 	for 	Chase 	appeared 	and 	advised 	the 	Court 	that 	Angeles 	had
signed off on a stipulation for adequate protection. 	Angeles did not
appear. 	The stipulation was filed on September 1, 2005, and an order
approving the stipulation was filed the next day.
On June 15, 2006, a motion was filed seeking authorization for
the debtors to refinance their home. 	An amended motion was filed on
June 	22, 	2006. 	The 	amended 	motion 	was 	noticed 	on 	a 	default 	basis.
No party in interest objected to the motion, and on July 20, 2006, an
order was entered granting the motion.
In the mean time, on July 17, 2006, Angeles filed an application
for additional fees (the “Original Application”). 	The work for which
she sought these fees was described as follows:
1. 	Telephone 	calls, 	e-mails, 	correspondence
and 	conferences 	with 	Debtors, 	Chapter 	13
Trustee, 	mortgage 	lender 	and 	escrow
officers 	regarding 	bankruptcy 	procedures
and requirements to refinance or sell real
property to payoff their remaining Chapter
Plan;
2. 	Preparation 	of 	pleadings, 	supporting
documents 	and 	requirement 	regarding
refinance 	or 	sell 	real 	property 	to 	payoff
remaining 	Chapter 	13 	Plan 	required 	by
Debtors, 	Chapter 	13 	Trustee, 	mortgage
lender and escrow officers.
The 	Original 	Application 	stated 	that 	Angeles 	had 	spent 	nine
hours 	performing 	these 	services 	and 	that 	her 	hourly 	rate 	was 	$200.
In 	addition, 	it 	sought 	reimbursement 	for 	out 	of 	pocket 	expenses 	of
$19.46 	for 	postage. 	The 	Original 	Application 	stated 	in 	one 	place
Case: 05-42310 Doc# 43 Filed: 10/06/06 Entered: 10/06/06 14:53:04 Page 3 of 8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
4The Original Application stated earlier that Angeles was
applying for additional fees of $3,000. 	This figure made no sense.
The Court assumed that what was intended by this reference was the
total of the original amount received plus the additional amount
requested. 	However, the total would have been $3,600.
4
that 	Angeles 	was 	seeking 	approval 	of 	additional 	fees 	and 	costs 	of
$1,819.46. 4 	Attached to the application are time sheets reflecting
services 	provided 	relating 	to 	the 	refinance 	during 	the 	period 	from
May 	3, 	2006 	through 	July 	13, 	2006 	for 	which 	the 	charges 	totaled
$1,800. 	Postage costs totaling $19.46 are also listed. 	Elsewhere in
the Original Application, however, it is stated that fees totalling
$3,000 are being requested.
Attached to the Original Application was an Attorney-Client Fee
Agreement (the “Fee Agreement”). 	The Fee Agreement states that the
debtors agreed to pay Angeles a total minimum fee of $1,800 for her
services 	in 	the 	chapter 	13 	case. 	The 	Fee 	Agreement 	contains 	the
following 	language: 	“The 	retainer 	fee 	may 	not 	be 	the 	total 	fee 	in
the case. 	Client understands that this agreement is limited to those
services listed in paragraph 6.”
Paragraph 6 states that:
“In 	return 	for 	the 	compensation, 	Attorney 	agrees 	to
perform the following services:
LEGAL COUNSELING AND EVALUATION. 	Legal counseling and
evaluation relating to chapter 13 bankruptcy.’
PREPARATION AND FILING OF BANKRUPTCY. 	Preparing and
filing of bankruptcy papers. 	Client will provide upon
request 	all 	the 	necessary 	documents 	and 	information
necessary to prepare the bankruptcy petition prior to
filing with the court.
CREDITOR 	INQUIRIES. 	Handling 	creditors 	during
the pendency of the bankruptcy.
COURT 	APPEARANCE. 	Appearing 	with 	the 	Client 	at
the Meeting of the Creditors/§341 hearing.
Case: 05-42310 Doc# 43 Filed: 10/06/06 Entered: 10/06/06 14:53:04 Page 4 of 8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
5
BANKRUPTCY PLAN. 	Respond to objections to plan
confirmation and if necessary prepare an amended
plan. 	Prepare, 	file, 	and 	serve 	one 	(1)
necessary 	plan 	modification 	which 	may 	include
suspending, 	lowering, 	or 	increasing 	plan
payments.
AMENDMENTS 	TO 	BANKRUPTCY. 	Prepare, 	file, 	and
serve 	necessary 	amended 	schedules. 	Amendments
to 	Schedule 	F 	including 	additions 	of 	new
creditors, 	deletions 	or 	changes 	after 	the
bankruptcy 	petition 	is 	filed 	shall 	be 	charged
$150.00 	for 	each 	amendment 	plus 	a 	$20 	fee
charged by the bankruptcy court.
REAL 	PROPERTY. 	Buy, 	sell 	or 	refinance.
Prepare, 	file, 	and 	serve 	necessary 	motions 	to
buy, 	sell, 	or 	refinance 	real 	property 	when
appropriate or contemplated by the plan.
OBJECTION 	TO 	CLAIMS. 	Object 	to 	improper 	or
invalid 	claims, 	if 	necessary, 	based 	upon
documentation 	or 	provided 	by 	the 	debtor.
Additional 	fees 	if 	evidentiary 	hearing 	is
required as stated below.
MOTIONS FOR RELIEF FROM STAY. 	Represent debtor
in 	relief 	from 	stay 	motions 	filed 	by 	secured
creditors to obtain possession of real property,
vehicles, etc. usually in default, etc.
LIEN 	AVOIDANCE 	MOTIONS. 	Where 	appropriate,
prepare, 	file, 	and 	serve 	necessary 	motions 	to
avoid 	liens 	on 	real 	or 	personal 	property.
Additional 	fees 	if 	evidentiary 	hearing 	is
required as stated below. [Emphasis added.]
Paragraph 	9 	states 	that 	“[f]or 	any 	services 	not 	covered 	under
this 	Agreement 	or 	by 	the...[Rights 	and 	Responsibilities], 	Client
agrees to pay by the hour at Attorney’s prevailing rates....”
The body of the Original Application indicated that it was being
noticed on a default basis, parties in interest being given 20 days
to object. 	However, fee applications may not be noticed on a default
basis. 	B.L.R. 	9014-1(b)(1)(B). 	Angeles 	also 	filed 	a 	notice 	of
hearing 	on 	the 	application, 	scheduling 	the 	hearing 	for 	August 	4,
2006. 	However, she failed to file a proof of service of the notice.
When Angeles appeared before the Court on August 4, 2006, the Court
Case: 05-42310 Doc# 43 Filed: 10/06/06 Entered: 10/06/06 14:53:04 Page 5 of 8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
6
noted the procedural confusion. 	The Court noted that, since she had
filed a Rights and Responsibilities, she would be entitled to a total
fee 	of 	$3,500 	without 	a 	court 	order. 	However, 	if 	she 	wished 	to
request 	additional 	fees 	bringing 	the 	total 	higher 	than 	that, 	she
would have to renotice the application. 	In addition, she would have
to 	attach 	time 	sheets 	covering 	all 	of 	the 	services 	provided 	in 	the
case.
Angeles filed an amended application (the “Amended Application”)
on September 14, 2006 and noticed it for hearing on October 6, 2006.
The 	Amended 	Application 	requested 	additional 	fees 	of 	$3,281.25.
Since 	all 	Angeles 	did 	after 	filing 	the 	Original 	Application 	was
prepare 	and 	file 	the 	Amended 	Application, 	it 	is 	unclear 	why 	her
request increased in this fashion. 	In any event, she is not entitled
to fees for correcting her own mistakes.
However, 	the 	Court 	has 	now 	noted 	a 	more 	serious 	problem. 	The
Fee 	Agreement 	includes 	the 	services 	for 	which 	she 	is 	requesting
additional fees-–i.e., the refinance of the debtors’ real property--
within the services covered by the initial $1,800 fee. 	While the Fee
Agreement contains some language that could be construed otherwise,
there is more language supporting the view that all of the services
described in paragraph 6 are covered by the initial fee. 	Thus, the
Amended Application will be denied with prejudice.
Moreover, 	given 	the 	language 	of 	the 	Fee 	Agreement, 	the 	Court
views 	Angeles’s 	request 	for 	additional 	fees 	for 	these 	services 	at
worst as unethical and at best as seriously negligent. 	Any repeated
Case: 05-42310 Doc# 43 Filed: 10/06/06 Entered: 10/06/06 14:53:04 Page 6 of 8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
7
conduct 	of 	this 	nature 	will 	likely 	result 	in 	the 	imposition 	of
serious sanctions.
The 	Court 	may 	be 	unique 	in 	requiring 	a 	chapter 	13 	debtor’s
attorney 	to 	provide 	a 	copy 	of 	its 	retention 	agreement 	when 	the
attorney 	applies 	for 	additional 	fees. 	The 	Court 	adopted 	this
procedure 	when 	a 	previous 	instance 	of 	a 	similar 	nature 	came 	to 	the
Court’s attention: i.e., the attorney requested additional fees which
were 	not 	authorized 	by 	the 	fee 	agreement. 	The 	Court 	intends 	to
circulate 	this 	opinion 	to 	the 	other 	bankruptcy 	judges 	in 	this
district 	and 	to 	post 	it 	on 	the 	website 	to 	alert 	them 	to 	this
potential problem.
END OF DOCUMENT
Case: 05-42310 Doc# 43 Filed: 10/06/06 Entered: 10/06/06 14:53:04 Page 7 of 8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
8
COURT SERVICE LIST
Eleanor Tumaneng Angeles
Angeles & Associates, PLC
2610 Central Ave., Ste. 1130
Union City, CA 94587
Ben Dalodado Cadalin
Lorie Montemayor Cadalin
290 Dogwood Court
Hayward, CA 94544
Martha G. Bronitsky
P.O. Box 5004
Hayward, CA 94540-5004
Case: 05-42310 Doc# 43 Filed: 10/06/06 Entered: 10/06/06 14:53:04 Page 8 of 8