A Plano bankruptcy attorney who prosecuted two simultaneous Chapter 13 cases but failed to secure for debtor a discharge violated Rule 9011. The conduct of a Chapter 13 debtor’s attorney in filing the petition that initiated the debtor’s second case, when he knew of the pendency of the debtor’s first case and the disposition of his motion to convert the first case to Chapter 13, was objectively unreasonable and thus violated Rule 9011. Given the oral conversion of the first case, there was no need to file the second case. The attorney took advantage of creditor confusion in filing the second case, effectively eliminating creditor claims while increasing his overall fees. As a result, the debtor, by means of delay and a change in underlying state law, pocketed all of the net sales proceeds from his home without paying creditors a cent. The attorney both signed the petition initiating the second case and advocated it before the bankruptcy court, despite failing to fit within any recognized excuse for opening the second case without completing the first or making a convincing case for creating any new exceptions.
Related posts: