In re White Glove, Inc.
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
1998 WL 226781 (1998)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
Anthony Baker was the chief executive officer of White Glove, Inc. (Inc) (debtor) and White Glove Enterprises (Enterprises) (debtor), entities that operated car washes. Baker owned the land on which Inc’s car washes were located and was Inc’s landlord. Inc and Enterprises each commenced chapter 11 bankruptcy cases and sought orders authorizing the retention of Robert Cohen’s law firm (Cohen). Baker also wanted Cohen to represent Baker’s personal interests in the bankruptcy proceedings. Cohen had previously represented Inc, Enterprises, and Baker in various legal matters, and Inc owed Cohen $39,000 in legal fees. Baker had guaranteed payment of the $39,000 at Cohen’s request, but this arrangement was not disclosed in Inc’s application to retain Cohen. The bankruptcy trustee and the unsecured-creditors committee objected to the applications to retain Cohen. The objectors asserted that (1) Cohen was not disinterested in either bankruptcy case given Cohen’s representation of Baker, (2) Cohen was not disinterested in Inc’s case because it was Inc’s creditor for the $39,000 legal-fee claim, and (3) Inc and Enterprises had claims against each other and had recently transferred money to each other, which could raise a potential conflict of interest if Cohen represented both entities. Baker contended, among other things, that Inc and Enterprises might present a joint reorganization plan, which would make having one lawyer desirable.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sigmund, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 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.