In re Lee
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California
94 B.R. 172 (1989)
- Written by Ryan Hill, JD
Facts
Chile and Hae Sook Lee (the Lees) (debtors) were the sole shareholders and operators of the Seoul Corporation (Seoul) (debtor), a merchandise and jewelry wholesaler. Seoul filed for reorganization under chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code, and then the Lees a filed a second chapter 11 case on their own behalf. The Lees and Seoul had a number of overlapping creditors, and the two debtors shared joint liability on many debts. Both the Lees and Seoul sought to be represented by the same law firm. The law firm filed parallel applications with the bankruptcy court for appointment as counsel to both chapter 11 cases but intentionally withheld the related nature of the filings. The law firm affirmed in both cases that it was not connected with any other interested party except for the debtor. The bankruptcy court became aware of the parallel applications and issued an order to show cause as to why the law firm should not be disqualified from representing both parties.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bufford, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.