Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t: Current Issues for Professionals Seeking Compensation in Bankruptcy Cases Under 11 U.S.C. § 330

As to whether to defend their fee application under 11 U.S.C. § 330, professionals may well be damned if they do and damned if they don't. This article analyzes this statutory conundrum, surveying recent developments and issues for professionals employed under § 330 of the Bankruptcy Code. Topics discussed include (1) the various methods courts use to define "reasonable, actual, and necessary" compensation; (2) awards for the costs incurred while defending a fee application; (3) fee enhancements, including the Fifth Circuits cases on CRG Partners Grp., L.L.C. v. Neary (In re Pilgrim’s Pride Corp.) and ASARCO L.L.C. v. Jordan Hyden Womble Culbreth & Holzer, P.C. (In re ASARCO L.L.C.); and (4) post-judgment interest accruing during the defense of a fee award. The author argues that the Fifth Circuit has been correct to uphold decades of precedent allowing fee enhancements after the Supreme Court decision in Perdue v. Kenny A. ex rel. Winn, 559 U.S. 542 (2010), and that fees incurred in the defense of fee applications should be recoverable.