Quiat v. Berger (In Re Vann)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “conflicts of interest, standing alone, could justify the denial of all fees,” and holding that the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in ordering disgorgement, pursuant to § 329, because of a law firm’s conflict of interest
• “[t]here is no reason to suggest the rationale of Woods does not apply in fee determinations under § 329.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).