UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
EDELL ROBERT GRAY
DEBTOR CASE NO. 07-21638
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
These matters are submitted to the court on the Application to Allow Attorney Fees to Eric A. Steiden (“the Fee Application”), and a Motion to Strike the Objection of the Debtor to those Fees (“the Motion to Strike”).
On March 12, 2008, Eric A. Steiden filed the Fee Application requesting an order be entered allowing him $3,024.00 to be paid through the debtor’s chapter 13 plan. The Fee Application gave parties 20 days to file an objection. The Certificate of Service to the Fee Application reflects that debtor was timely served the Fee Application.
On May 23, 2008, an order was signed granting the Fee Application. On June 2, 2008, an Objection to the Fee Application (“the Objection”) was filed by the debtor. The Objection requested the court to review the Fee Application to determine if it was reasonable. The Objection stated that Eric A. Steiden had previously withdrawn from the case because he perceived a conflict in the case.
The Motion to Strike was entered on July 29, 2008, the motion argues that the debtor should have objected within the 20 day period provided in the Fee Application. The Motion to Strike also contains a section replying to the Objection. That section reveals that there is a dispute as to whether Eric A. Steiden voluntarily withdrew from the case as counsel for the debtor, or whether debtor substituted himself as counsel. That section also reveals that Eric A. Steiden believed he had a conflict with continuing representation of both the debtor and the debtor’s non-filing co-debtor wife.
On August 5, 2008, a Supplement to the Motion to Strike was filed. The supplement modifies the Fee Application to the extent that it requests approval of $2,649.00 to be paid through the debtor’s chapter 13 plan.
On August 5, 2008, a hearing was held on these matters. At the hearing, the debtor denied receiving service of the Fee Application within the 20 day period to object. However, the debtor did not have complaints against the legal services of Eric A. Steiden in general, but the debtor asked for the court to review the records of the case to determine if the fees requested in the Fee Application were reasonable.
The court has reviewed the records in this case. The court finds that there is a controversy over whether the debtor was properly served, that the debtor substituted himself as counsel as he signed the Motion to Substitute Counsel, that Eric A. Steiden had adequate reason to be concerned about continuing representation of both the debtor and debtor’s non-filing co-debtor wife, and that all fees requested in the Fee Application as modified in the Supplement to Motion to Strike are reasonable.
For those reasons, the Motion to Strike is OVERRULED, and the Fee Application is SUSTAINED in the amount of $2,649.00 to be paid through the debtor’s chapter 13 plan.
Eric A. Steiden, Esq.
Beverly M. Burden