1:11-bk-11152•West End Financial Advisors LLC and Joshua Rizack
Gesamter Gesetzestext
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------X In re: : : Chapter 11 WEST END FINANCIAL ADVISORS, : Case No.: 11-11152 (SMB) LLC, et. al., : (Substantively Consolidated) : Debtors. : ------------------------------------------------------X MEMORANDUM DECISION AWARDING FINAL FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES A P P E A R A N C E S: ROBINSON BROG LEINWAND GREENE GENOVESE & GLUCK P.C. Attorneys for Debtors 875 Third Avenue, 9th Floor New York, New York 10022 A. Mitchell Greene, Esq. Of Counsel ARENT FOX LLP Attorneys for Mark S. Radke 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20036 Peter V. B. Unger, Esq. Mark S. Radke, Esq. Of Counsel KLESTADT & WINTERS, LLP Attorneys for Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors 570 Seventh Avenue, 17th Floor New York, New York 10018 Tracy L. Klestadt, Esq. Fred Stevens, Esq. Joseph C. Corneau, Esq. Of Counsel 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 1 of 61
2 TRACY HOPE DAVIS United States Trustee 33 Whitehall Street, 21st Floor New York, New York 10004 Brian Masumoto, Esq. Of Counsel U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 3 World Financial Center New York, NY 10281 Alistaire Bambach, Esq. Neal Jacobson, Esq. Of Counsel STUART M. BERNSTEIN United States Bankruptcy Judge: The matter before the Court concerns the remaining objections to two of the several final fee applications filed in these confirmed cases. The debtors’ attorneys, Robinson Brog Leinwand Greene Genovese & Gluck P.C. (“Robinson Brog”), seek final fees and expenses in the amounts of $2,151,281.50 and $43,968.39, respectively. Arent Fox LLP (“Arent Fox”), the attorneys for Mark S. Radke, Esq. the Independent Monitor (“Monitor”) appointed by the District Court, originally sought an award of pre-petition fees and expenses in the amounts of $32,792.84 and $8,004.06, respectively, and an award of post-petition fees and expenses in the amounts of $283,941.06 and $20,249.19, respectively. The debtors and the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the “Committee”) objected to Arent Fox’s application, and the United States Trustee and the Securities & Exchange Commission (“SEC”) objected to Robinson Brog’s application. Having considered these objections and conducted my own review of the parties’ applications, I conclude that Robinson Brog is entitled to a final award of fees and expenses, respectively, in the amounts of 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 2 of 61
3 $1,926,074.42 and $43,968.39. Arent Fox is entitled to a final award of fees and expenses, respectively, in the amounts of $173,953.65 and $17,121.35. BACKGROUND This has been a contentious case involving many disputes, but the following discussion is limited to what is necessary to understand the disposition of the pending fee applications. In 2000, William Landberg formed West End Financial Advisors, LLC as an investment and financial management company, and eventually established forty-two limited partnership funds as investment vehicles. Landberg provided advice to investors and induced them to invest in these funds. It appears that Landberg operated these entities to some extent as a Ponzi scheme although they did make many legitimate investments, and he was eventually replaced as Chief Executive Officer by Ray Heslin in June 2009. On January 20, 2011, the SEC commenced an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “District Court Action”) against three affiliated investment firms and four of West End’s former or current senior officers, including Landberg. (See Securities and Exchange Commission v. Landberg, 11 CV 00404 (PKC) (S.D.N.Y. 2011).) The SEC sought various forms of relief, including an injunction preventing the defendants from associating with any securities brokers, alleging fraud, misuse of client assets and other securities laws violations. On or about February 10, 2011, District Judge P. Kevin Castel appointed Radke, a partner in Arent Fox, as Monitor of West End Financial Advisors LLC, West End Capital Management LLC, and Sentinel Investment Management Corporation (collectively defined in the District 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 3 of 61
4 Court’s order as the “Company”). (Amended Stipulation & Order, dated Feb. 10, 2011 (“ASO”).) Paragraph 2 of the ASO imposed the following duties on Radke: a. to review and approve the design of a liquidating plan to distribute the Company’s assets if the Company becomes a debtor under the Bankruptcy Code (in which case the Company will apply to the Bankruptcy Court for the continuation of Radke as Monitor); b. to review all fees, expenses and transactions engaged in or incurred by the Company since May 2009; c. to review investment decisions made on behalf of the Company since May 2009; d. to review the Company’s financing and investment advisory arrangements with third parties since May 2009; e. to review and approve any expense accrued by the Company subsequent to the date of the ASO in excess of $25,000 per item; f. to review all future non-incidental and official communications by the Company to investors; and g. to review the Company’s plans to identify and pursue claims against third parties. Paragraph 3 of the ASO spelled out the billing rates for Radke, his partner Peter Unger, Esq., and the associates in their law firm, required Radke to render monthly bills to the Company and the SEC, and directed Radke to submit his bills to the Court for approval when the accumulated fees reached $100,000. Approximately one month later, on March 15, 2011, and with the exception of West End Cash Liquidity Fund I L.P. and West End Dividend Strategy Fund I. L.P., each of the debtors filed chapter 11 petitions in this Court. On June 9, 2011, West End Cash Liquidity Fund I L.P. filed its chapter 11 petition, and on July 6, 2011, West End Dividend Strategy Fund I L.P. filed its chapter 11 petition. By order dated July 25, 2011, the debtors’ estates were partially substantively consolidated. Robinson Brog, the firm that had represented the debtors pre- petition, was eventually retained to represent the debtors in the chapter 11 cases. 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 4 of 61
5 One week after the initial chapter 11 filings, the office of the United States Trustee filed a motion to appoint a chapter 11 trustee (“Trustee Motion”). (ECF Doc. # 8.) The SEC joined in the Trustee Motion. (See Joinder of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to Motion by United States Trustee for Order Directing Appointment of Chapter 11 Trustee or, in the Alternative, Converting These Cases to Chapter 7, dated Mar. 22, 2011 (ECF Doc. # 13).) Although Radke did not formally join in the motion, he submitted a declaration in support of the SEC’s joinder, taking on an active role as an advocate, and ultimately, a witness on behalf of the United States Trustee and the SEC. (See Declaration of Mark S. Radke in Support of Joinder of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to Motion by United States Trustee for Order Directing Appointment of Chapter 11 Trustee or, in the Alternative, Conversion of the Cases to Chapter 7, dated Mar. 24, 2011 (ECF Doc. # 21).) The Court conducted several days of evidentiary hearings in connection with the Trustee Motion. The debtors subpoenaed documents from Radke, and he, his law firm and the debtors spent a significant amount of time fighting over objections to the subpoena, and ultimately, presenting those objections to the Court for resolution. In addition, and as noted, Radke testified as a fact witness during the hearings. The Trustee Motion was no longer pressed once the parties began to make progress on a consensual plan, and was withdrawn after the debtors confirmed the plan on January 26, 2012. In the meantime, by order dated July 29, 2011 (the “Freeze Order”), District Judge Castel suspended Radke’s duties under the ASO as of July 27, 2011, but directed the “Company” to apply to the Bankruptcy Court to retain Radke as the Monitor with the duties set forth in the ASO, as amended by the Freeze Order, nunc pro tunc to March 15, 2011, the petition date. The debtors made the motion on August 12, 2011 (ECF Doc. # 203), and by order dated September 8, 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 5 of 61
6 2011 (the “Radke Retention Order”), this Court authorized the retention of Radke pursuant to sections 105 and 363 of the Bankruptcy Code, nunc pro tunc to the petition date “as the Debtor’s independent monitor under the specific terms of the ASO and the Freeze Order.” (ECF Doc. # 214.) The Radke Retention Order expressly required Radke to apply to this Court for compensation and reimbursement of expenses pursuant to section 330 of the Bankruptcy Code, and that “[s]uch application shall be subject to the Office of the United States Trustee’s guidelines for compensation and reimbursement of expenses and the approval of this Court under 11 U.S.C. § 330.” After confirmation, the Court heard the applications by the various professionals for final compensation and reimbursement of expenses. It resolved all but two from the bench, and reserved decision on the applications filed by Robinson Brog and Arent Fox. DISCUSSION A. Introduction Bankruptcy Code § 330 authorizes a bankruptcy court to award reasonable compensation to a fee applicant based on the actual, necessary services, and to reimburse him for his actual, necessary expenses. 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(1). The relevant criteria include the following: (A) the time spent on such services; (B) the rates charged for such services; (C) whether the services were necessary to the administration of, or beneficial at the time at which the service was rendered toward the completion of, a case under this title; (D) whether the services were performed within a reasonable amount of time commensurate with the complexity, importance, and nature of the problem, issue, or task addressed; (E) whether the [professional] is board certified or otherwise has demonstrated skill and experience in the bankruptcy field; and 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 6 of 61
7 (F) whether the compensation is reasonable based on the customary compensation charged by comparably skilled practitioners in cases other than cases under this title. 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(3). The fee applicant bears the burden of proof on its claim for compensation. Houlihan Lokey Howard & Zukin Capital v. High River Ltd. P’ship, No. 05 Civ. 5726 (BSJ), 2007 WL 1217268, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 24, 2007); Zeisler & Zeisler, P.C. v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. (In re JLM, Inc.), 210 B.R. 19, 24 (B.A.P. 2d Cir. 1997); In re Keene Corp., 205 B.R. 690, 695 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1997). Even in the absence of an objection, the Court has an independent duty to scrutinize the fee request. In re Busy Beaver Bldg. Ctrs., Inc., 19 F.3d 833, 841 (3d Cir. 1994). The applicant must submit contemporaneous time records, although a computerized printout summary, in lieu of the original time slips, will suffice. Masterwear Corp. v. Angel & Frankel, P.C. (In re Masterwear Corp.), 233 B.R. 266, 278 & n.14 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1999). The standards for time records are contained in this Court’s Fee Guidelines, as amended, and the guidelines issued by the Executive Office of United States Trustees. See 28 C.F.R., pt. 58, App. A (2011) (“UST Guidelines”). At bottom, proper time record keeping is necessary to enable the court to determine the reasonableness of the work that has been performed. Generally, fee applications, standing alone, must contain sufficient detail to demonstrate compliance with § 330. UST Guidelines, (b). Any uncertainties due to poor record keeping are resolved against the applicant. In re Poseidon Pools of Am., 216 B.R. 98, 100-01 (E.D.N.Y. 1997). Time records must be broken down by project. UST Guidelines, (b)(4)(i). Entries concerning communications (e.g., telephone calls, letters) should identify the parties and the nature of the communication. Id., (b)(4)(v). Entries relating to conferences or hearings should identify the subject of the hearing, and explain, where appropriate, why more than one 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 7 of 61
8 professional from the applicant participated. Id. Finally, multiple project services rendered on the same day should be listed in separate entries unless the aggregate daily time does not exceed one half hour. Id. Alternatively, and consistent with the practice followed here prior to the adoption of the UST Guidelines, the applicant may “lump” his daily project entries provided he indicates parenthetically the amount of time spent on each activity. A court does not determine “reasonableness” through hindsight. In re Brous, 370 B.R. 563, 570 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2007). A decision reasonable at first may turn out wrong in the end. The test is an objective one, and considers “what services a reasonable lawyer or legal firm would have performed in the same circumstances.” In re Ames Dep’t Stores, Inc., 76 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 1996) (citing In re Taxman Clothing Co., 49 F.3d 310, 315 (7th Cir. 1995) (Posner, J.)); accord In re Angelika Films 57th, Inc., 227 B.R. 29, 42 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1998); In re Keene Corp., 205 B.R. at 696; In re Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc., 133 B.R. 13, 23 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1991). The rules that govern fee awards and time record keeping in bankruptcy mirror those that apply in non-bankruptcy cases. Courts outside of bankruptcy generally apply the “lodestar” method under which they arrive at a fee “by multiplying ‘the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation . . . by a reasonable hourly rate.’” Kirsch v. Fleet St., Ltd., 148 F.3d 149, 172 (2d Cir. 1998) (quoting Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433 (1983)). The fee applicant bears the burden of proof to demonstrate the reasonableness and necessity of its services. Allende v. Unitech Design, Inc., 783 F. Supp. 2d 509, 512 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (“As the fee applicant, plaintiffs ‘bear[] the burden of documenting the hours reasonably spent by counsel, and the reasonableness of the hourly rates claimed.’”) (internal citation omitted); Tokyo Electron Arizona, Inc. v. Discreet Indus. Corp., 215 F.R.D. 60, 62 (E.D.N.Y. 2003) (“The party seeking 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 8 of 61
9 reimbursement bears the burden of proving the reasonableness and necessity of hours spent and rates charged.”) (citing New York State Ass’n for Retarded Children v. Carey, 711 F.2d 1136 (2d Cir. 1983)). “Applications for fee awards should generally be documented by contemporaneously created time records that specify, for each attorney, the date, the hours expended, and the nature of the work done.” Kirsch, 148 F.3d at 173. Lumping or block billing, a timekeeping practice that involves including multiple services in a single, aggregated time entry without any breakdown of the time spent on each service, complicates a court’s efforts “to gauge the reasonableness of time expended on each activity.” Ass’n of Holocaust Victims for Restitution of Artwork & Masterpieces v. Bank of Australia Creditanstalt, No. 04 Civ. 3600 (SWK), 2005 WL 3099592, at *5-6 & n.9 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 17, 2005); accord LV v. New York City Dep’t of Educ., 700 F. Supp. 2d 510, 525 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (“[B]lock-billing can make it ‘exceedingly difficult for courts to assess the reasonableness of the hours billed. In such circumstances courts have found it appropriate to cut hours across the board by some percentage.’”) (internal citations omitted); Williams v. New York City Hous. Auth., 975 F. Supp. 317, 327 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) (“Fee applicants should not ‘‘lump’ several services or tasks into one time sheet entry because it is then difficult, if not impossible, for a court to determine the reasonableness of the time spent on each of the individual services or tasks provided . . . . It is not the court’s job to decipher time entries and guess how much time each activity took . . . . It is the responsibility of the applicant to make separate time entries for each activity.’”) (quoting Poseidon Pools, 180 B.R. at 731) (citations omitted). Similarly, vague and ambiguous descriptions of work done prevent the court from assessing the reasonableness of the work, and should be eliminated or reduced. Cosgrove v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., No. 81 CIV. 3482 (AGS), 1996 WL 99390, at * 3 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 7, 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 9 of 61
10 1996) (“[M]any of the descriptions of the work performed are vague, including entries such as ‘review of file,’ ‘review of documents’ and ‘review of [adversary’s] letter.’ There can be no meaningful review of time records where the entries are too vague to determine whether the hours were reasonably expended.”) (citations omitted); Dotson v. City of Syracuse, No. 5:04-CV- 1388 (NAM/GJD), 2011 WL 817499, at *24 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2011) (“Descriptions of work such as ‘review of file’, ‘review of documents’ and ‘review of letters’ are vague and do not permit a court to evaluate the reasonableness of the services.”); Schruefer v. Winthorpe Grant, Inc., No. 99 Civ. 9365 (GBD)(AJP), 2003 WL 21511157, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2003) (imposing overall reduction of 10% based on vague time entries including “various phone conferences,” “review file,” “legal research,” and “case administration”). “[C]ourts have recognized that it is unrealistic to expect a trial judge to evaluate and rule on every entry in an application [and] have endorsed percentage cuts as a practical means of trimming fat from a fee application.” New York State Ass’n for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Carey, 711 F.2d at 1146. To address problems like block billing and vagueness, courts routinely apply across the board reductions. United States Football League v. Nat’l Football League, 887 F.2d 408, 415 (2d Cir. 1989) (affirming across the board reduction for vague time entries); Colon v. City of New York, Nos. 09 CV 0008 (JBW), 2012 WL 691544, at *21 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2012) (collecting cases); Reiter v. Metro. Transp. Auth. of the State of New York, No. 01 Civ. 2762 (GWG), 2007 WL 2775144, at *15 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2007) (collecting cases); Klimbach v. Spherion Corp., 467 F. Supp. 2d 323, 332 (W.D.N.Y. 2006) (applying a 10% across the board reduction for vague billing entries); Ass’n of Holocaust Victims, 2005 WL 3099592, at *7 (reducing lodestar amount by 25% to account for instances of block billing, vagueness and excess). 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 10 of 61
11 B. Robinson Brog Application 1. Introduction The United States Trustee and the SEC have lodged objections to the Robinson Brog application. The principal objection by both is directed at the services rendered in opposing the Trustee Motion. According to the SEC, the time charges aggregated approximately $210,606. (Objection of Securities and Exchange Commission to Fee Application of Robinson Brog Leinwand Greene Genovese & Gluck P.C., dated Feb. 8. 2012 (“SEC Objection”), at 3 (ECF Doc. # 332).) The bases of the objection are two-fold: the services did not benefit the estate, see 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(3)(C), and rendered Robinson Brog an interested person. See 11 U.S.C. § 328(c).1 The SEC also objects to the $43,063 in fees generated by Robinson Brog in prosecuting a motion in the District Court objecting to the Monitor’s fees and seeking to remove the Monitor. The United States Trustee and SEC argue that the Court should reduce the fees relating to the Examiner and his report, described below, and essentially surcharge Robinson Brog for the fees incurred by the Committee and the SEC. Finally, the United States Trustee argues that Robinson Brog’s time records fail to substantiate the firm’s services in accordance with the principles set down by this Court’s fee guidelines and the UST Guidelines. 2. Resolution of Objections a. The Trustee Motion “The cornerstone of Chapter 11 is the presumption that the debtor-in-possession will be permitted to operate its business after filing, unless there is cause for the appointment of a trustee.” Hansen, Jones & Leta, P.C. v. Segal, 220 B.R. 434, 458 (D. Utah 1998). The Bankruptcy Code nevertheless allows the Court to displace the debtor-in possession and appoint 1 The SEC argues that I should disallow all fees on this basis. (SEC Objection at 9.) 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 11 of 61
12 a chapter 11 trustee “for cause, including fraud, dishonesty, incompetence, or gross mismanagement of the affairs of the debtor by current management, either before or after the commencement of the case,” 11 U.S.C. § 1104(a)(1), or “if such appointment is in the interests of creditors, any equity security holders, and other interests of the estate.” 11 U.S.C. § 1104(a)(2). Under Bankruptcy Code § 1104(e), added in 2005, the United States Trustee must move for the appointment of a trustee if he or she has reasonable grounds to suspect that current members of the governing body of the debtor, the debtor’s chief executive or chief financial officer, or members of the governing body who selected the debtor’s chief executive or chief financial officer, participated in actual fraud, dishonesty, or criminal conduct in the management of the debtor or the debtor’s public financial reporting. Landberg appointed Ray Heslin, the president of the debtors, to his position, and I assume that this relationship prompted the Trustee Motion one week into the case. There is no per se rule that legal services provided by the debtor’s attorney in the defense of a trustee motion, even an unsuccessful defense, are not compensable. See In re Del Monico, No. 04 B 38235, 2006 WL 345013, at *4 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. Feb 15, 2006) (“[I]f the decision to oppose the motion [to appoint a chapter 11 trustee] was in the best interest of the estate at the time, compensation would still be appropriate regardless of the ultimate outcome.”) (emphasis in original); In re Spanjer Bros., Inc., 191 B.R. 738, 752 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1996) (“The Court therefore rejects the contention that a debtor’s attorney who opposes appointment of a trustee, and loses, should not receive any compensation for this time expended fighting that appointment.”); cf JLM, Inc., 210 B.R. at 25 (“If there is a reasonable basis for contending that the estate will benefit by opposing conversion or taking a position on other control-related matters, compensation will not be denied.”). Similarly, 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 12 of 61
13 the mere fact that an attorney for a debtor opposes and loses a motion for the appointment of a trustee under § 1104(a)(2) does not ipso facto demonstrate that the attorney is representing the interests of the debtor’s principals and management to the exclusion of the creditors, and thus breaches a fiduciary duty owed to the debtor. Spanjer Bros., 191 B.R. at 751. A debtor’s management enjoys the presumptive right to manage the debtor’s affairs, and does not violate the law by opposing a trustee motion. The debtor’s attorney acts on the instructions of the debtor’s management, and there is no basis to question the attorney’s disinterestedness absent evidence that the attorney represented the debtor’s management or insiders rather than the interests of the debtor at the direction of management. Id. at 751-52. The SEC argues that the opposition was intended to perpetuate Heslin in office, and incidentally, to protect Robinson Brog’s financial interest as attorney for the debtor-in- possession. The SEC points to the pre- and post-petition history citing the adversarial relationship fostered by Heslin and Robinson Brog, and their efforts to avoid SEC oversight. In addition, the SEC and the United States Trustee argue that the debtors could have proposed the same plan earlier in the case. They instead delayed, proposing a plan only after the Court denied the debtors’ motion for a judgment on partial findings at the close of the United States Trustee’s direct case, see FED R. C IV. P. 52(c), and it appeared that Heslin might be displaced. To be sure, this was a contentious case, and each side contributed. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the United States Trustee brought an immediate motion to appoint a chapter 11 trustee, leaving little time to the debtors to do anything other than gear up to defend it. The debtors were certainly not required to “roll over” simply because the United States Trustee and the SEC challenged Heslin’s continued management of the debtor’s affairs. Moreover, as discussed below, Robinson Brog had sent a draft plan to the Monitor, in accordance with the 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 13 of 61
14 ASO, which the Monitor ignored. The debtors thereafter filed a plan within one month after the Freeze Order eliminated the requirement in the ASO that the Monitor must approve of the plan. Furthermore, I reject the contention that Robinson Brog acted other than at the direction of Heslin to represent the debtors’ interests. The Government’s argument regarding Robinson Brog’s motives and its lack of disinterestedness could apply to every instance in which a debtor and its counsel oppose a motion to appoint a chapter 11 trustee or to convert a case. And although the Court denied the debtors’ motion for a directed verdict, it did not do so based on “clear and convincing” evidence that cause existed under Bankruptcy Code § 1104(a)(1),2 but instead, denied the motion under the “best interest of creditors” test embodied in Bankruptcy Code § 1104(a)(2). (Tr. (4/12/11) at 98-102.) Finally, the Court never decided the Trustee Motion because the confirmation of the debtors’ plan rendered it moot. In the end, the interests of the creditors and investors were best served by the continuation of the debtors’ management and Robinson Brog’s representation notwithstanding that this also inured to the benefit of Heslin and the firm. The debtors were able to confirm a complex plan that garnered the overwhelming support of all of the constituencies. I doubt that a chapter 11 trustee and new counsel, facing a steep learning curve, could have reached the same result in the same time. It is unfortunate that this overall goal could not have been accomplished in a quicker and cheaper fashion, but the level of contention and amount of litigation made this impossible. Robinson Brog did not do anything different from what other debtors’ counsel would have done under similar circumstances. The firm’s services opposing the Trustee Motion 2 The one exception concerned Heslin’s initial direction to the debtors’ bookkeeper to reallocate a portion of his salary to his wife, who also worked for the debtors, to protect his eligibility for disability payments. However, Heslin unilaterally reversed the reallocation, and his W-2 for that year reported all of his compensation. (Transcript of the hearing held April 12, 2011 (“Tr. (4/12/11)”), at 98 (ECF Doc. # 92).) 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 14 of 61
15 were reasonable, ultimately benefitted the estate by keeping management in place, and did not rob the firm of its disinterestedness simply by defending the motion. b. The Freeze Order The SEC also objects to the fees incurred in the proceedings that led to the Freeze Order. According to the SEC, the debtors moved by order to show cause signed by District Judge Castel on July 18, 2011, to remove the Monitor and object to his fees. The motion papers included a 24-page attorney affidavit along with 36 exhibits. (SEC Objection at 14.) On the July 27 return date, District Judge Castel expressed his displeasure with both sides.3 Paragraph 2(a) of the ASO directed the Company in the event of a bankruptcy filing to “make the appropriate application to the [bankruptcy] court for the continuance of Mr. Radke as the Independent Monitor.” The ASO contemplated that if bankruptcy ensued, most if not all of the issues regarding the Monitor, including his continuation and compensation, would be handed off to this Court. (See District Court Transcript at 22, 26.) As of July 27, 2011, more than four months after the petition date, the debtors had not yet made the motion, blaming the Monitor’s refusal to supply an affidavit of disinterestedness. (Id. at 2-3.) The Monitor contended that he refused to provide the affidavit because he had consulted with bankruptcy lawyers at his firm who told him it was not needed. (Id. at 22-23.) District Judge Castel criticized both parties for failing to bring their inability or refusal to comply with the ASO to his attention, or seek relief from the ASO. 3 A copy of the July 27, 2011 transcript (the “District Court Transcript”) is attached as Exhibit B to the debtors’ Response to Objections of United States Trustee and Securities and Exchange Commission to Final Application of Robinson Brog Leinwand Greene Genovese & Gluck P.C. for Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses, dated Feb. 13, 2012 (ECF Doc. # 346). 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 15 of 61
16 Paragraph 2(a) of the ASO also required Radke to “review and approve the design of a plan of distribution to liquidate and distribute the Company’s assets.” The debtors sent Radke a draft plan on May 3, 20111, but he essentially ignored it because he viewed it as “bare bones” and insufficient. (Id. at 18-19.) The District Court stated that Radke should have at least acknowledged receipt of the plan and if appropriate, explained that he declined to comment on it. (Id. at 19-20.) In addition, paragraph 3(d) of the ASO directed Radke to submit monthly bills to the debtors and the SEC, and submit the bills for District Court approval when the fees accumulated $100,000.00. He failed to do so, blaming the delay on his computer system. District Judge Castel admonished Radke for not seeking relief from the monthly bill requirement. (Id. at 21.) Furthermore, when he finally submitted bills to the SEC, he failed to share them with the debtors. (Id. at 28-29.) He also failed to advise the debtors when his fees hit $100,000.00. (Id. at 22.) Finally, when Radke provided a draft report to the SEC, he did not also send a copy to the debtors. (Id. at 29-30.) The District Court ultimately concluded that the debtors failed to comply with the ASO and the Monitor acquiesced in that non-compliance. (Id. at 26-27.) The debtors should have applied to the Bankruptcy Court to retain the Monitor, and the Monitor should have presented his fee application to the Bankruptcy Court. (See id. at 22.) Consequently, the Monitor sought approval of his fees in the wrong court, and District Judge Castel declined to rule on the application. The debtors were directed to take immediate steps in the Bankruptcy Court to retain the Monitor nunc pro tunc to the petition date. Finally, with the agreement of all parties, the Monitorship was “frozen,” and the debtors’ were relieved of the requirement that the Monitor approve the plan. (See id. at 36-38.) The Freeze Order followed. 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 16 of 61
17 The proceedings before District Judge Castel epitomized the parties’ penchant for litigation as a substitute for communication. Both sides ignored their obligations under the ASO. The issues—the execution of an affidavit of disinterestedness, the motion to retain the Monitor in the Bankruptcy Court, the need for the Monitor’s approval of the plan—should have been resolved through a chambers conference to the extent that they could not have been resolved through a telephone call. By late July, the parties had stood down from the Trustee Motion, they were making progress negotiating a plan, and the Monitor’s role had faded into the background. The debtors nonetheless decided to initiate emergency litigation. Obviously, the part of the debtors’ motion objecting to the Monitor’s fees was entirely unnecessary. It should have been made in this Court, as it eventually was, but for the debtors’ failure to seek the Monitor’s retention. On the other hand, the need for the Monitor’s approval of the plan presented a potentially serious obstacle to progress in the case. The debtors had sent a draft plan to the Monitor in early May, but he ignored it. Once the requirement for his approval was eliminated under the Freeze Order, the case moved much more quickly to a successful conclusion. Given the tenor of the case, I remain unconvinced that the Monitor would have surrendered the approval requirement as willingly as he did when pressed by District Judge Castel. Thus, it was reasonable and necessary for the debtors to seek that relief. In short, although the fee objection aspect of the debtors’ motion was entirely unnecessary, the motion to eliminate the approval requirement was necessary. Accordingly, 50% of the time spent on the motion, $21,531.50 will be allowed, and the remaining 50% will be disallowed. 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 17 of 61
18 c. The Fee Examiner Litigation Bankruptcy Code § 327(a) requires that counsel for the debtor must be disinterested and not hold or represent an interest adverse to the estate. A disinterested person is one who does not hold a claim against the estate or have an interest materially adverse to the estate. 11 U.S.C. § 101(14). When the debtors sought to retain Robinson Brog as bankruptcy counsel, the United States Trustee objected arguing that the firm had conflicts with the estate that precluded its retention. The firm faced a disgorgement claim in connection with its pre-petition fees. It also faced potential preference liability. Finally, it had received funds from Chartis Specialty Insurance Company (“Chartis”), the debtors’ insurer, but had failed to account satisfactorily for those funds. Robinson Brog suggested a compromise that had been adopted in Exco Res., Inc. v. Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP (In re Enron), No. 02 Civ. 5638 (BSJ), 2003 WL 223455 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 2, 2003). There, the Bankruptcy Court had authorized the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors to retain Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP (“Milbank”) as its counsel in the bankruptcy proceedings. A creditor subsequently filed a motion to disqualify Milbank. It alleged, among other things, that Milbank had received preferences, and therefore, held an interest adverse to the unsecured creditors. The District Court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court’s conclusion that the preferences did not require disqualification. The examiner appointed in the Enron case would determine whether Milbank received a preference, Milbank waived its right to litigate the preference issue, and agreed to be bound by the examiner’s determination. The Bankruptcy Court had concluded and the District Court concurred that Milbank’s agreement to be bound by the examiner’s determination resolved the argument that Milbank held an adverse interest. Id. at *9. 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 18 of 61
19 Robinson Brog made a similar proposal to resolve the objections to its retention, and agreed to be bound by that determination without further litigation. Accordingly, upon motion of the United States Trustee, the Court ordered the appointment of an examiner to investigate whether Robinson Brog should disgorge any pre-petition fees, whether the firm received preferences that could be recovered by the estates and whether Robinson Brog should be surcharged based on the failure to fully account for $825,000 received from Chartis. (Order Directing the Appointment of an Examiner Pursuant to Section 1104(c) of the Bankruptcy Code, dated June 16, 2011 (ECF Doc. # 157).) The United States Trustee appointed Albert Togut, Esq. as examiner. Togut rendered his Fee Examiner’s Report (the “Report”) (ECF Doc. # 261) on December 8, 2011, after first providing a draft to Robinson Brog and affording the firm the opportunity to comment. The Report reflects a conscientious effort to perform his duties in a fair and balanced manner. It concluded that the pre-petition fees should be reduced by $163,472.71 based on insufficient substantiation, and that Robinson Brog had received a preference in the amount of $254,045.06. In substance, Robinson Brog owed the estate $417,517.77. (Id. at 49.) The examiner also rejected Robinson Brog’s argument that it should be permitted to set off $132,967.66 in fees that it had previously waived. (Id. at 49-50.) This should have ended the matter, but Robinson Brog filed an objection to the Report, challenging many of the examiner’s findings and conclusions. (Objection to the Acceptance of the Fee Examiner’s Report, dated Dec. 12, 2011 (ECF Doc. # 262).) The objection triggered a response from the SEC which complained that Robinson Brog had agreed to abide by the Report and waived any right to object. (Response of Securities and Exchange Commission to Objection by Robinson Brog Leinwand Greene Genovese & Gluck P.C. to Examiner’s Report, dated Dec. 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 19 of 61
20 21, 2011 (ECF Doc. # 268).) In light of the opposition and the Court’s statements, Robinson Brog withdrew its objection to the Report at the hearing. The entire episode involving the appointment of the examiner, the preparation of the Report and the litigation following Robinson Brog’s objections became a point of contention during the fee hearings. In substance, the SEC and United States Trustee contend that the process was put in place at Robinson Brog’s suggestion to overcome the objections to its retention, and Robinson Brog should bear all of the costs. Robinson Brog has already excised from its fee application the value of the services it expended in connection with the fee examiner matters, and this time is not included in its request for compensation. In addition, the Court indicated on several occasions that the examiner’s fees would be deducted from any fee award in Robinson Brog’s favor precisely for the reasons articulated by the Government. Accordingly, the Court will disallow Robinson Brog’s final fee in the amount of $111,680.24, which reflects the $110,000.00 in fees awarded to Togut and his firm and $1,680.24 in expenses. (See Order Awarding Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses for the Fee Examiner and his Counsel, dated Feb. 17, 2012 (ECF Doc. # 353).) Finally, the SEC and the United States Trustee argue that the Court should also reduce Robinson Brog’s fees by the amount of fees generated by Committee counsel in connection with Robinson Brog’s objection to the Report. The SEC contends further that the fee award should be reduced by the amount of reasonable attorneys’ fees attributable to the SEC’s response to Robinson Brog’s objection. I agree with the former but not the latter. The Committee’s counsel expended services valued at $8,507.00 dealing with the examiner issues, and has been compensated by the estate for its time. Robinson Brog rather than the estate’s creditors should bear those expenses for the reasons articulated above, and this amount will be disallowed from 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 20 of 61
21 Robinson Brog’s request. On the other hand, while the SEC provided reasonable and necessary services in connection with its response to Robinson Brog’s objection to the Report, the creditors of the estate will not have to bear the costs. Thus, reducing Robinson Brog’s award based on the value of the SEC services would simply be a penal measure that I decline to impose. d. Recordkeeping and Substantiation The last area of objections concerns Robinson Brog’s time keeping entries. The majority of Robinson Brog’s time entries satisfy the Court and UST Guidelines, but there are two exceptions. First, as identified on Schedule A, more than 10% of the firm’s entries made by thirteen timekeepers involve the activity of “reviewing” documents, and total 678 hours and aggregate $282,541.69 in fees.4 I interpret “review” to mean “read.” See In re CCT Commc’ns, Inc., No. 07-10210 (SMB), 2010 WL 3386947, at *8 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Aug. 24, 2010). Conducting a reasonable review of specific documents for a necessary purpose is ordinarily compensable. Here the document being “reviewed” is sometimes described with specificity, but more often, timekeepers are “reviewing” generic categories of documents, such as “schedules,” “claims” and the like, for no apparent purpose. Robinson Brog has failed to satisfy its burden of showing the reasonableness or necessity for so many people “reviewing” so many documents, many of which are described in such general terms that it is impossible to discern what the timekeeper is reviewing or why. This form of record keeping justifies a 20% across the board reduction on this category of entries, and $56,508.34 in fees is disallowed. 4 These entries do not include any other verb, such as “review and revise.” 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 21 of 61
22 Second, one timekeeper (HEF) billed 134.9 hours, valued at $53,960.00, performing services identified as “attention to” some document or activity. These entries are summarized on Schedule B. In an earlier case also involving Robinson Brog, the Court concluded that another firm’s use of the description “attention to” made it impossible to determine the nature of the service or the activity that it purported to describe, and disallowed 50% of those time charges. CCT, 2010 WL 3386947, at *8. I reach the same conclusion here, and disallow 50% of these time charges, or $26,980.00. In summary, Robinson Brog sought fees aggregating $2,151,281.50, fees in the sum of $225,207.08 have been disallowed for the reasons stated above, and Robinson Brog is entitled to a final fee award in the sum of $1,926,074.42. The United States Trustee had also lodged objections to certain other time entries primarily on the ground that the descriptions in the records were inadequate. To the extent those objections or any other objections are not addressed in this opinion, they are overruled. Finally, Robinson Brog seeks $43,968.39 as reimbursement for its expenses. No party has challenged any particular expense, and they are allowed. C. Arent Fox Application 1. Introduction Arent Fox filed its first and final fee application on January 6, 2012. (ECF Doc. # 285.) The application sought fees incurred from the petition date to December 31, 2011 in the sum of $283,941.06 and reimbursement of expenses in the sum of $20,249.19. The application also sought approximately $41,000 in compensation and expenses in connection with pre-petition work. 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 22 of 61
23 The Arent Fox application elicited several objections. The Committee argued that (1) the firm was not entitled to an allowance of fees incurred prior to the petition date, (2) the Court never authorized Radke to retain his firm, and hence, the firm should not be compensated, (3) Radke’s services exceeded the scope of his appointment, (4) the Court should disallow any fees in excess of $100,000 because Arent Fox failed to apply to the District Court for approval of its fees until they reached $278,728.76, (5) Radke and his firm are not entitled to compensation for his services as a trial witness, responding to the debtors’ subpoena and opposing the debtors’ motion in the District Court to remove him as Monitor, (6) many of the firm’s time records include lumped entries, and (7) Radke and Arent Fox incurred unreasonable and unnecessary luxury travel expenses. (Objection of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors to First and Final Application of Arent Fox LLP Independent Monitor of the Debtor Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Sections [sic] 330 for Allowance of Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses, dated Feb. 8, 2012 (ECF Doc. # 334).) The debtors joined in the Committee’s objection, amplifying certain of the arguments. During the February 15, 2012 hearing on the fee application, the Court expressed reservations about Radke’s compensation for the time spent as a witness in connection with the Trustee Motion and the related subpoena, and directed him to break out that time in the firm’s records. (Transcript of the hearing held Feb. 15, 2012 (“Tr. (2/15/12)”), at 49, 51 (ECF Doc. # 361).) In addition, virtually all of the time records were “lumped,” but the Court offered Arent Fox the opportunity to reconstitute its time records to show the amount of time that was spent on 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 23 of 61
24 various tasks on the same day.5 (Id. at 49.) The Court also directed Arent Fox to separate out its pre-petition services. (Id. at 50.) Arent Fox submitted its supplemental papers on or about February 28, 2012 (the “Supplement”), which clarified the time records and resolved some of the issues raised by the Committee. (See ECF Doc. # 356.) Arent Fox removed the request for pre-petition fees and expenses from the application presently before the Court. It also subdivided its post-petition work into three categories reflected in three schedules: (1) the time attributable to Radke’s participation as a witness at the hearing on the Trustee Motion, (2) the time attributable to responding to the debtors’ subpoena and litigating with the debtors regarding the subpoena, and (3) everything else. In its subsequent objection, joined in by the Committee, the debtors continued to press their objections to Arent Fox’s fee application. According to the debtors, the Supplement still failed to comply with the UST Guidelines and section 330 of the Bankruptcy Code, the reconstructed non-contemporaneous time records were unreliable and should be subject to “strict scrutiny,” and the additional detail still included lumped, vague and non-compensable time entries. (See Debtors’ Supplemental Objection to the Additional Time Record Detail Submitted by the Independent Monitor and his Counsel in Connection with their Fee Application, dated Mar. 2, 2012 (ECF Doc. # 359).) The debtors also marked up the records supplied by the applicant indicating its specific objections to particular entries. 5 The pervasive lumping apparently escaped the notice of the United States Trustee who did not object to Radke’s fees, but nevertheless asserted a lumping objection to a di minimis number of Robinson Brog’s time records. 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 24 of 61
25 2. Resolution of the Objections to Fees Several of the issues raised by the Committee require only brief comment. First, Arent Fox has withdrawn its request for pre-petition fees and expenses from its pending application. Second, Arent Fox is entitled to compensation for its reasonable and necessary services representing Radke although the firm was not formally retained by an order of this Court. The ASO expressly contemplated that members and associates of Arent Fox would assist Radke in the performance of his duties. It established the billing rate for Radke’s partner, Unger, (ASO at ¶ 3(b)), and identified the range of acceptable billing rates for the firm’s associates. (Id. at ¶ 3(c).) The Radke Retention Order (at ¶ 2) provided for his retention nunc pro tunc to the petition date “under the specific terms of the ASO and the Freeze Order.” It was not intended to modify the provisions of the ASO that contemplated Radke’s use of members and associates of his firm, and it was unnecessary for him to make a separate application in this Court to retain his firm. Third, I decline to penalize Arent Fox for its failure to submit a fee application to the District Court until its fees reached nearly $280,000.00. I do not condone the failure, but the debtors and the Committee have not been prejudiced. They do not contend that the District Court would have vacated or limited Radke’s appointment as Monitor once the fees reached $100,000, and they have had ample opportunity to object to the fees on the merits. Fourth, I decline to disallow the time spent by Arent Fox responding to the debtors’ order to show cause in the District Court. The debtors initiated that litigation, the order to show cause imposed tight time constraints, and Arent Fox’s response was reasonable under the circumstances. In addition, the across the board reduction discussed below effectively reduces the allowed amount of time dealing with this matter. 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 25 of 61
26 The remaining objections, on the other hand, have greater merit and illustrate two general problems with the Arent Fox application. With three exceptions, Radke’s role as Monitor was essentially a passive one. He was directed to “review” the debtors’ distribution plan, “review” all fees, expenses, investments decisions, transactions, financing and investment advisory arrangements with third parties since May 2009, “review” all future non-incidental and official communications to the investors and “review” the debtors’ plans to identify and pursue claims against third parties. (ASO at ¶ 2.) The three exceptions involved Radke’s role in approving the design of the distribution plan, (id.), approving any expense in excess of $25,000 per item, (id.), and reporting to the District Court. (Id. at ¶ 5.) Radke certainly had to keep informed regarding the bankruptcy in his role as Monitor. Thus, he or a member of his firm would be expected to attend the multi-day hearings on the Trustee Motion in order to “monitor” the proceedings. Nevertheless, Radke exceeded his role and duties as Monitor, and Arent Fox rendered services that were unreasonable and unnecessary to those duties, when Radke became a de facto party to and advocate for the Trustee Motion. The chapter 11 cases were filed on March 15, 2011, the Trustee Motion was filed one week later, and the SEC sought to join in the Trustee Motion on March 24, 2011. During that nine day period (March 15 to March 24), Radke worked with the SEC and the United States Trustee to prepare a declaration that the SEC eventually submitted in support of its motion to join in the Trustee Motion. Radke subsequently testified as a fact witness in the direct case on the Trustee Motion based on what he had learned as Monitor, and in connection with his testimony, responded to the debtors’ subpoena and engaged in unsuccessful litigation regarding the assertion of privilege with respect to certain of the responsive documents. (See Transcript of the hearing held Mar. 31, 2011, at 4-7 (ECF Doc. # 106).) 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 26 of 61
27 I do not mean to suggest that it was inappropriate for Radke to testify as a fact witness or object to the debtors’ subpoena. If he had relevant evidence to give, he was obliged to give it. If the debtors sought documents that he had a reasonable basis to believe were privileged, he had the right to resist disclosure. Nevertheless, Radke’s role as de facto party, advocate and trial witness exceeded his duties as Monitor, and the costs should not be borne by the debtors’ creditors. Tab 2, Schedule A to the Supplement shows that Radke and the firm billed the aggregate amount of $21,000.00 in connection with Radke’s participation as a witness during the trial of the Trustee Motion. Tab 2, Schedule B to the Supplement indicates that Arent Fox billed the aggregate amount of $39,867.00 in connection with its services relating to the trial subpoena and resulting litigation. These fees are disallowed. Finally, several of the entries in Tab 3, Schedule C to the Supplement expressly or impliedly relate to Radke’s preparation of the declaration submitted in support of the SEC’s joinder in the Trustee Motion during the first nine days of the case. These entries aggregate $5,632.00, and are disallowed.6 The second general problem with the Arent Fox time records concerns the quality of the record keeping and the failure to satisfy the substantiation requirements. The Radke Retention Order stated that the firm’s recordkeeping must comply with the UST Guidelines. The Radke Retention Order was signed on September 8, 2011. Although Radke’s retention under the order was made nunc pro tunc to the March 15, 2011 petition date, virtually all of the services were performed prior to then and under the ASO. 6 The disallowed time, by date, timekeeper and amount are as follows: 3/16/11 (Unger-$487.00; Radke- $682.50); 3/18/11 (Radke (four entries)-$525.00, $105.00, $157.50, $367.50); 3/22/11 (Radke (three entries)- $525.00, $1,575.00, $420.00); 3/24/11 (Radke (two entries)-$525.00 (“Work on draft declaration for bankruptcy court”), $262.50). 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 27 of 61
28 The parties have sparred over whether it would be fair to force Arent Fox for to meet the UST Guidelines. The dispute is immaterial because even if the UST Guidelines did not apply, the Arent Fox application would still have to satisfy the record keeping requirements imposed on fee applicants outside of bankruptcy, including the requirement for contemporaneous time records that are neither vague nor lumped. The balance of the time recorded in Tab 3, Schedule C to the Supplement, which I compute to be $217,442.06, reflects the product of after-the-fact efforts to “unblock” the time entries following the February 15, 2012 hearing. To this extent, they are reconstructed rather than contemporaneous. Moreover, even if the time entries attached to the Supplement were considered contemporaneous, their accuracy would be suspect. Most of the entries are billed in half-hour or whole-hour increments. Arent Fox’s Tab 3, Schedule C includes 390 separate time entries, of which 256 meet these criteria.7 This indicates that time was recorded in round numbers without any significant effort to detail the actual time spent on services. Of greater concern, many of these large blocks of time contain woefully vague descriptions and lumped entries, such as “reviewing,” “working” on or “drafting” various documents of general or no description, “participating” in conferences or telephone calls described in the most general way, or simply “preparing” for court, making it impossible to determine if the amount of time spent was reasonable. A sampling of these entries is annexed to this opinion as Schedule C. Under the circumstances, the Court will exercise its discretion to apply a 20% across the board reduction to the balance of the time entries in Tab 3, Schedule C that were not previously addressed. Accordingly, Arent Fox’s fees are allowed in the amount of 7 One would expect that 20% of the time, or only 78 entries, would be billed in half-hour or whole-hour increments. 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 28 of 61
29 $173,953.65. The Court has considered the remaining objections, and to the extent not specifically addressed, are overruled as lacking in merit. 3. Resolution of Objection to Expenses As noted, the debtors and the Committee also objected to the reimbursement of certain expenses sought by Arent Fox, charging that Radke and Arent Fox lawyers traveled first class between New York and Washington and stayed in expensive New York hotels. In its Supplement, Arent Fox agreed to reduce its out-of-town transportation and lodging expenses by 25% or $3,127.84. This is an appropriate resolution, and accordingly, the firm is entitled to an award of reimbursed expenses in the sum of $17,121.35. The debtors’ counsel is directed to submit a fee order consistent with this decision. Dated: New York, New York July 2, 2012 /s/ Stuart M. Bernstein STUART M. BERNSTEIN United States Bankruptcy Judge 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 29 of 61
Schedule A 1 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 3/22/2011 AMG 2.00 550.00 1,100.00 REVIEW OF US TRUSTEE MOTION TO CONVERT OR APPOINT CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE ASSET DISPOSITION 4/15/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF TRANSCRIPT OF DECISION RE: DIRECTED VERDICT ASSET DISPOSITION 5/27/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW HANK EMAIL REGARDING SALE OF FUSION STOCK (.2) ASSET DISPOSITION 8/17/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF APPROVAL REGARDING SOUTHWOOD COURT SALE OF LOT ASSET DISPOSITION 10/18/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF STIPULATION REGARDING SOUTHWOOD RELEASE ASSET DISPOSITION 12/14/2011 FBR 1.50 475 712.50 REVIEW OF OPERATING AGREEMENT OF ALL FOUR LLC'S TO DETERMINE RESTRICTION ON TRANSFERABILITY AND JUSTIFICATION FOR PRIVATE SALE ASSET DISPOSITION 12/15/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF DZ AMENDMENT ASSET DISPOSITION 12/20/2011 FBR 2.00 475 950.00 REVIEW OF OPERATING AGREEMENTS FOR SALES ENTITIES ASSET DISPOSITION 12/20/2011 FBR 2.00 475 950.00 REVIEW OF SALES AGREEMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER ASSET DISPOSITION 1/4/2012 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF COMMENT TO SALE MOTION ASSET DISPOSITION 1/4/2012 FBR 0.90 475 427.50 REVIEW OF MEMBERSHIP INTEREST MOTION ASSET DISPOSITION 1/5/2012 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW FINAL VERSION OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT (0.2) 7/5/2011 AMG 1.00 550.00 550.00 REVIEW OF FTI REPORT BUSINESS OPERATIONS 7/27/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF REVISED 20 LARGEST AND MASTER MAILING LIST BUSINESS OPERATIONS 9/15/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT FRANCHISE FUND AGING OF LOANS BUSINESS OPERATIONS 9/16/2011 AMG 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF REPORT FROM FRANCHISE FUND BUSINESS OPERATIONS 9/19/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF SERVICER REPORT WITH RAY BUSINESS OPERATIONS 10/3/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF SEC COMMENT TO DISCLOSURE STATEMENT BUSINESS OPERATIONS 10/25/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF SERVICING REPORTS BUSINESS OPERATIONS 11/11/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF OPERATING SERVICING REPORT BUSINESS OPERATIONS 12/22/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF NFA BAILOUT PLAN AND SCHEDULES BUSINESS OPERATIONS 12/22/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO TRUST AGREEMENTS BUSINESS OPERATIONS 12/27/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF EMAILS FILED ON ECF BUSINESS OPERATIONS 12/28/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT AMENDMENT LOAN DOCUMENTS BUSINESS OPERATIONS 12/31/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT AMENDED LOAN DOCUMENT BUSINESS OPERATIONS 1/5/2012 FBR 0.90 475 427.50 REVIEW OF PROPOSED NORTH LIGHT LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT MARKUP BUSINESS OPERATIONS 1/8/2012 FBR 1.60 475 760.00 REVIEW OF REVISED NORTHLIGHT LOAN DOCUMENTS BUSINESS OPERATIONS 1/12/2012 AMG 1.60 550.00 880.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA LOAN DOCUMENT ISSUES BUSINESS OPERATIONS 3/1/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF MONITOR LETTER TO COURT REQUESTING ANTIBANKRUPTCY INJUNCTION CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/1/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF 1007 EXHIBITS AND BANKRUPTCY SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/1/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DOCS ON RETENTION ISSUES CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/2/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF SEC LETTER CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/2/2011 LS 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF PETITIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/2/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF PETITION BACKUP CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF 362 RE SEC & ENFORCEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CAPTION RE CHAPTER 11 FILINGS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RETAINER CORRESPONDENCE CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BILLING CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/4/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CONSOLIDATED CREDITOR SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/4/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CONSOLIDATED SCHEDULE OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/4/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF REVISIONS TO SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/7/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RESERVATION WITH AMG CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/7/2011 LS 1.00 400.00 400.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES TO 1007 CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/7/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF LOCAL RULES RE: COMPLIANCE CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/8/2011 JDD 0.30 425.00 127.50 REVIEW OF COURT DECISION ON RADKE'S LETTER MOTION CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/9/2011 BBN 1.80 325.00 585.00 REVIEW OF DZ CLOSING BINDER FOR ORIGINAL DZ LOAN RE: WEST END FIRST DAY ORDERS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/9/2011 BBN 2.00 325.00 650.00 REVIEW OF CLOSING BINDER FOR AMENDED AND RESTATED DZ LOAN RE: WEST END FIRST DAY ORDERS CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 30 of 61
Schedule A 2 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 3/9/2011 BBN 2.30 325.00 747.50 REVIEW OF CLOSING BINDER FOR SECOND A&R DZ LOAN RE: WEST END FIRST DAY ORDERS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/10/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW RADKE LETTERS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/10/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF SEC ARTICLE ON CLAW BACKS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/11/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF RADKE LETTER TO COURT CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/11/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF EXPENSE JOURNAL CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/11/2011 RRL 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF EXPENSE JOURNAL W/LS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/14/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF COMMENTS TO 1007 SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/15/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF JUDGE CASTEL MEMO ENDORSED LETTER CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/15/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF INSURANCE MEDIATION DEMAND CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/15/2011 BBN 0.60 325.00 195.00 REVIEW OF ORG CHART FOR FILING OF BANKRUPTCY FOR ACCURACY OF OWNERSHIP CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/15/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF CORRESP TO CASTEL RE NOTICE OF FILING CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/16/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA BANK CORRESP RE SET-OFF CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/16/2011 RMS 1.00 400.00 400.00 REVIEW OF DOCS REGARDING AMENDING PETITIONS AND MOTIONS WITH LS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/18/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF RADKE LETTER TO INVESTORS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/18/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF JUDGE CASTEL'S ORDER(.5) AND RADKE'S NEW LETTER(.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/18/2011 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF DZ CLOSING DOCUMENTS FOR CASH COLLATERAL ISSUES CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/18/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RADKE EMAILS RE: CASES CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/18/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF COMMITTEE SOLICITATION FORM CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/18/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF RAD AND EQUITY LISTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/18/2011 RMS 0.10 400.00 40.00 RECEIVED AND REVIEW OF EMAIL FROM G.H. AND AMG REGARDING DOCS FOR ATTORNEY ON FILING CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/18/2011 RMS 0.10 400.00 40.00 RECEIVED AND REVIEW OF EMAIL AMG REGARDING ATTORNEY CONTACT INFORMATION ON POSSIBLE REPRESENTATION CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/21/2011 AMG 1.00 550.00 550.00 REVIEW OF RAD AND DEBT AND L TO PARTNER SCHEDULES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/21/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF 1007 TO COMPLETE OTHER MOTIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/21/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF EQUITY HOLDER LISTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/22/2011 BBN 0.70 325.00 227.50 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT CLOSING BINDER AND DZ DISK FOR CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/22/2011 BBN 2.40 325.00 780.00 REVIEW OF E-MAILS RE RADS - WEST END SPECIAL OPPORTUNITY FUND LP CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/25/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF EQUITY, RAD, LP SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/25/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF UST CORRESP RE EQUITY, RAD AND LP LISTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/28/2011 LN 1.00 110.00 110.00 REVIEW DOCUMENT PRODUCTION FOR ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/31/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF TOM REED EMAIL CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/1/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF 2004 FORM CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/4/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CHECKLIST - FIRST-DAY ORDERS AND SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/5/2011 HEF 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF WEST END INCOME STRATEGIES FUND AND WEST END SPECIAL OPPORTUNITY FUND OFFERING MEMOS (.8); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/5/2011 HEF 1.20 400.00 480.00 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT LOAN DOCUMENTS (1 .2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/5/2011 HEF 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF FILE DOCUMENTS (.2) 4/5/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CONSOLIDATED CREDITOR SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/5/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF MEMO-ENDORSED RE LPS COMMUNICATIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/6/2011 BBN 1.60 325.00 520.00 REVIEW OF ML MIPA FOR NOTIFICATION REOUIREMENTS TO ML UPON BANKRUPTCY CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/6/2011 BBN 1.50 325.00 487.50 REVIEW OF FILES FOR SWAP AGREEMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/6/2011 HEF 2.20 400.00 880.00 REVIEW OF TRANSACTION DOCUMENTS AND MEMBERSHIP INTEREST PURCHASE AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/6/2011 HEF 1.30 400.00 520.00 REVIEW OF 2008 FLOA AND RELATED DOCUMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/6/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF 1007 AND SCHEDULES RE MERRILL LYNCH CONTACT COUNSEL INFO CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/7/2011 HEF 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW NFA I FILE DOCUMENTS (.1); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/7/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF 327 PROVISIONS RE DISINTERESTED STANDARDS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/7/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF ESCROW RUN CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/8/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES WITH CW CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 31 of 61
Schedule A 3 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 4/11/2011 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF NY UCC FILINGS - NO NORTHLIGHT FILINGS FOR WEFA AND WEMFF (.4); REVIEW DE UCC WEB SEARCH (.8) CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/11/2011 HEF 2.60 400.00 1,040.00 REVIEW DECEMBER 18, 2009 AMENDED AND RESTATED LOAN AGREEMENT WITH NORTHLIGHT; REVIEW VENTURE RESTAURANT PARTNERS GOVERNANCE DOCUMENTS AND 2008 TAX RETURNS (2.6); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/11/2011 HEF 1.60 400.00 640.00 REVIEW OF TERM SHEETS (1.3) AND REVIEW OF FILE RECORDS RE ALLEGED EXCLUSIVITY BREACHES (.3). CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/11/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES TO 1007 CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/12/2011 HEF 2.30 400.00 920.00 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT AND DZ ISDA SWAP TRANSACTION DOCUMENTS (2.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/13/2011 HEF 2.20 400.00 880.00 REVIEW OF PLEADINGS AND TRIAL MATERIALS (.2); REVIEW OF WEST END GOVERNANCE DOCUMENTS (2.0) CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/13/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF 363 AND 327 RE RETENTION LANGUAGE CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/14/2011 KS 2.00 201.35 402.70 REVIEW LP AND LLC DOCUMENTS OF ALL ENTITIES CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/14/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF 341 NOTICES CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/15/2011 HEF 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT LOAN DOCUMENTS (.6) AND REVIEW OF HESLIN DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF FIRST DAY MOTIONS (.1) CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/15/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF TRIAL TRANSCRIPT CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/15/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF RETENTION ORDER AND APPLICATION CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/15/2011 KS 2.50 201.35 503.38 REVIEW WEST END APRIL 12 HEARING TRANSCRIPT CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/20/2011 HEF 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT LOAN DOCUMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/20/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF AUGIE RESTIVO CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/25/2011 AJG 3.30 315.42 1,040.87 REVIEWED E-MAILS DEMONSTRATING CO- MINGLING (2.0); REVIEW OF BANK STATEMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/26/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF FOGERTY LEITER TO COURT CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/26/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF SEC EMAIL REGARDING ADJOURNMENT OF RADKE REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/26/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF MEMO OF LAW ON OSC TO REMOVE RADKE CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/26/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF BUDGET CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/27/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF WEST END PRODUCTION TO INVESTORS AND CREDITORS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/28/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF RADKE EMAIL RE: HIS CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL OF PRODUCTION RE: PROFF OF CLAIMS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/28/2011 HEF 1.00 400.00 400.00 REVIEW OF VRP ORGANIZATIONAL DOCUMENTS (.5); REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS (.5) CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/28/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF BUDGET CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/28/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF LEASES AND LEASE SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/28/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF 1007 AND SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/28/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF WEST END NON-DEBTOR AFFILIATES SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/28/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF TAX RETURNS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/29/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF UPDATED NON-DEBTOR AFFILIATE LIST CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/29/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF WEST END 101 CHECKLIST CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/29/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CONSOLIDATED RAD, NOTEHOLDER AND LP SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/2/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF OPERATING REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF TAX RETURNS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULE OF RAD AND NOTEHOLDERS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/3/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF FISCHER/RADKE EMAIL CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/3/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CREDITORS' COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/4/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF US TRUSTEE OBJECTION TO RETENTION OF R & B CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/5/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF TRUSTEE ORDER ON SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/5/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF EVIDENCE BINDERS RE INFO FOR SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/9/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF INVESTOR EMAIL INQUIRIES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/9/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BANK RECONCILIATION FOR OP REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/9/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES ORDER CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 32 of 61
Schedule A 4 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 5/9/2011 LS 1.20 400.00 480.00 REVIEW OF EVIDENCE BINDERS - ACCT RECONCILIATIONS FOR SCHEDULES PREP AND BACKUP CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/10/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF INFO FOR SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/10/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SPREADSHEET TEMPLATE CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/10/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF COLLIERS FOR CREDITOR LISTS AND FORMAT CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/10/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CONTRACTS FOR SCHEDULE G CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/10/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF DISCLAIMER FOR SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/10/2011 LS 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF DRAFT SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/10/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DEBTOR'S LIST WITH LN CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/11/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES BACKUP CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/11/2011 LS 1.20 400.00 480.00 REVIEW OF CREDITOR SPREADSHEETS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/12/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF STATUS OF PREP OF SCHEDULES AND OPEN ISSUES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/12/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF INVESTOR SPREADSHEETS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/12/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF NOTES TO INVESTOR SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/12/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF TRUSTIIRA INFO CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/12/2011 LS 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES AND BACKUP CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/13/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES WITH AMG CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/16/2011 LS 1.10 400.00 440.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES WITH HESLIN CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/16/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ESCROW RUN CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/17/2011 AMG 0.70 550.00 385.00 REVIEW OF OBJECTION TO CASH COLLATERAL AND SUB CONSOLIDATION BY IBERIA CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/17/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEWED UST OBJECTION TO SUB CON CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/17/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES WITH AMG CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/17/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES WITH FBR CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/17/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF 3 CALF CREEK BACKUP CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/18/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF APRIL SERVICING REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/18/2011 AMG 3.60 550.00 1,980.00 REVIEW OF ALL CENTURY LOAN DOCUMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/18/2011 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF FILE FOR CENTURY LIEN ISSUE CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/19/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/19/2011 BBN 0.80 325.00 260.00 REVIEW OF CENTURY BANK CREDIT AGREEMENT WITH WEMFF FOR CHOICE OF LAW PROVISION, COLLATERAL, ETC CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/19/2011 BBN 0.60 325.00 195.00 REVIEW OF CENTURY BANK PLEDGE AGREEMENT RE COLLATERAL DESCRI PTION CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/19/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF OP REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/19/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF COMMITTEE RETENTION DOCS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/19/2011 RRL 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF COMMITTEE RETENTION CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/20/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF MOTION FOR STAY RELIEF OF SETOFF BY IBERIA BANK CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/20/2011 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF UCC ARTICLE 9 RE BASICS OF CREATION OF A VALID SECURITY INTEREST CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/20/2011 BBN 2.80 325.00 910.00 REVIEW OF CASES RE CENTURY ISSUE CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/20/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF FINANCIALS FOR OP REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/20/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF OP REPORTS WITH AMG CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/23/2011 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF SECTION OF CENTURY AGREEMENTS AND UCC FILINGS RE APPLICABLE LAW CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/23/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF OP REPORTS WITH R. HESLIN CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/23/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF UST INVOICES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/23/2011 MEB 1.30 500.00 650.00 REVIEW OF BBN MEMO RE: CENTURY LIEN CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/24/2011 BBN 1.70 325.00 552.50 REVIEW OF DELAWARE CASES RE IBERIA CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/24/2011 BBN 0.80 325.00 260.00 REVIEW OF ARTICLE RE UCC ARTICLE 9-406 - PAYMENT INTANGIBLE RE: IBERIA CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/25/2011 BBN 1.50 325.00 487.50 REVIEW OF ARTICLES RE 9-406/9-408 RE: IBERIA CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/25/2011 HEF 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF UCC SECTIONS 9-406 AND 9-408. (.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/25/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES WITH AMG CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/26/2011 BBN 2.40 325.00 780.00 REVIEW OF ANALYSIS IN POWELL ARTICLE RE IBERIA CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/26/2011 HEF 1.90 400.00 760.00 REVIEW OF CERTIFICATES, WARRANTS, CONVERSION LETTER AND SCHEDULE 13D (1.9) CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/26/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF EMAILS RE SOUTHWOOD COURT PROPERTIES CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/26/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF MASTER SERVICE LIST CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/26/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RETURN MAIL FOR UPDATE TO SERVICE LIST CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/26/2011 MEB 0.50 500.00 250.00 REVIEW OF REVISED MEMO RE: CENTURY LIEN CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/27/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF FTI RETENTION PAPERS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/27/2011 BBN 1.40 325.00 455.00 REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS RE EUREKA CASE RE: IBERIA CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/27/2011 BBN 2.30 325.00 747.50 REVIEW OF EUREKA CASE RE: IBERIA CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/27/2011 HEF 4.00 400.00 1,600.00 REVIEW OF FUSION 10K'S FOR TRANSFER RESTRICTIONS ON STOCK (2.6); REVIEW LOCK UP AGREEMENT (1.4); CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 33 of 61
Schedule A 5 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 5/27/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RETENTION DOCS CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/31/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF LETTER TO COURT CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/31/2011 AMG 1.80 550.00 990.00 REVIEWOF NOTES RE SECTION 9-406, 9-408, 8-103 AND DEFINITIONS RE: IBERIA MEMO CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/31/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF BILLING WITH AMG CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/31/2011 MEB 0.70 500.00 350.00 REVIEW OF BBN REVISED MEMO RE: CENTURY LIEN CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/1/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW E-MAIL (.2) CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/1/2011 BBN 0.70 325.00 227.50 REVIEW OF ANDERSON DEBT CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/2/2011 BBN 3.40 325.00 1,105.00 REVIEW OF DELAWARE TREATMENT OF LIENS IN VIOLATION OF OPERATING AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/2/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF PETITION BACKUP RE TAX ID NOS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/2/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF EMAILS RE BCD ADDRESS CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/2/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF MASTER SERVICE LIST CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/3/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF RADKE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND STIPULATION AND ORDER CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/3/2011 BBN 0.80 325.00 260.00 REVIEW OF NFA INTEREST PURCHASED FROM ML PURSUANT TO A&R MIPA CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/3/2011 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF TRANSFER AND EXCHANGE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WEST END & NORTHLIGHT W/RESPECT TO NFA FUNDING LLC CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/3/2011 BBN 1.50 325.00 487.50 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT FOOD FRANCHISE FUND LP OPERATING AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/3/2011 HEF 1.60 400.00 640.00 REVIEW DRAFT OF MEMO ADDRESSING SAME FROM BRENDA NATARAJAN. (1.6) CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/6/2011 BBN 0.60 325.00 195.00 REVIEW OF HEF MARKUP TO CENTURY MEMO CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/6/2011 BBN 0.60 325.00 195.00 REVIEW OF NOTICE LETTERS FROM IBERABANK TO WEMFF AND MERCURY CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/7/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF FTI PRELIMINARY REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/7/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF SUB CON MATERIAL CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/7/2011 BBN 0.60 325.00 195.00 REVIEW OF MERCURY OPERATING AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/7/2011 BBN 1.80 325.00 585.00 REVIEW OF UCC SECTION 9-104, 9106, 9-312, 9-306 AND 9-304 CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/7/2011 MEB 0.40 500.00 200.00 REVIEW OF REVISED MEMO RE: CENTURY LIEN RE: WEMFF CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/7/2011 MEB 0.30 500.00 150.00 REVIEW OF ISSUES AND MEMO RE: CENTURY LIEN RE: MERCURY CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/8/2011 BBN 0.30 325.00 97.50 REVIEW OF JDD DISKS FOR DOC PRODUCTION DISKS CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/8/2011 BBN 0.60 325.00 195.00 REVIEW OF DOC PRODUCTIONS DISKS FOR WESTLB CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/9/2011 BBN 0.30 325.00 97.50 REVIEW OF CD FOR WESTLB LOAN CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/10/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF FRED STEVENS LETTERS TO THE COURT REGARDING SUB CON ADJOURNMENT REQUEST CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/13/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF EMAILS FROM NORTHLIGHT, SEC REGARDING SUB CONSOLIDATION CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/13/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF FOGERTY LETTER CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/13/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF PROPOSED RESPONSE TO GREENBERG CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/13/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF LP EMAILS CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/17/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF FILE RE OP REPORT BACKUP CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/20/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF OP REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/20/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF BALANCE SHEET CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/20/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF EMAILS RE 2004 CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/21/2011 BBN 0.40 325.00 130.00 REVIEW OF IMEST END UCC FILE CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/21/2011 BBN 0.70 325.00 227.50 REVIEW OF MEMO RE UCC FILINGS AGAINST WEST END ENTITIES CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/21/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF ASSET SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/22/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF CASH LIQUIDITY PET/MATRIX CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/22/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES OF ASSETS RE LLC INTERESTS; CHICAGO DIVERSIFIED NOTE CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/22/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF LIST OF AFFILIATED DEBTORS CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/23/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF TRANSCRIPT RE: EXAMINER CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/24/2011 BBN 0.40 325.00 130.00 REVIEW OF NFA FUNDING II LLC ORG CHART CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/24/2011 BBN 0.40 325.00 130.00 REVIEW OF NFA EQUIPMENT FUND ORG CHART CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/24/2011 BBN 0.40 325.00 130.00 REVIEW OF MCC FUNDING ORG CHART CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/24/2011 BBN 0.80 325.00 260.00 REVIEW OF NOTES RE WEST END ORG. STRUCTURE POST JANUARY 2010 TRANSACTION CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/27/2011 AJG 0.60 315.42 189.25 REVIEWED CAPLEASE UCC'S (.6) CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/29/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF COMMITTEE CORRESP CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/4/2011 AJG 2.10 315.42 662.37 REVIEW OF FTI REPORT WITH NOTES SENT TO AMG.(2.1) CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/6/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF PETITION BACKUP CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/6/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF WEST END DIVIDENDS STRATEGY FILE CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 34 of 61
Schedule A 6 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 7/6/2011 RRL 1.10 550.00 605.00 REVIEW OF FIRST INTERIM REPORT OF 1M CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/8/2011 AMG 1.40 550.00 770.00 REVIEW OF REVISED SUB CON REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/8/2011 RRL 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW ESCROW ACCOUNTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/11/2011 AMG 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF FTI REPORT AND EXHIBIT CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/11/2011 RRL 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF DRAFT FTI REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/12/2011 AJG 0.80 315.42 252.33 REVIEW OF FTI MODEL (.8) CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/15/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF MERGED CREDITOR SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/15/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF LP ACCT RECONCILIATIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/19/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF REVISED FTI REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/19/2011 BBN 0.40 325.00 130.00 REVIEW OF CENTURY FILE AND NOTES CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/19/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES/LP ACCOUNT RECONCILIATIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/20/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF SUB CON (.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/20/2011 LN 1.50 110.00 165.00 REVIEW OF OPERATING REPORTS FOR JUNE CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/20/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF OP REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/20/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ASSET LIST FOR JUNE OP REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/21/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF EMAILS TO COURT REGARDING FOGERTY, BAUM CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/22/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF INVESTOR CORRESPONDENCE CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/22/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF HESLIN REVISIONS TO OP REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/25/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF DOCKETS RE APPEARANCES; CLOSING CASES CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/25/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CASE ASSOCIATIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/25/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF OP REPORTS WITH AMG CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/25/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA STIP RE SALE/DEED IN LIEU CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/25/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF ORIGINAL SCHEDULES AND ASSET LIST CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/26/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/26/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF APPEARANCES & SERVICE LISTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/26/2011 RRL 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF SUBS CON SOL TRANSCRIPT CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/27/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ASSET LIST - REVISED CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/27/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DOCS AND STATUTES ON MONITOR CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/28/2011 RRL 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF DIST COURT TRANSCRIPT CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/29/2011 HEF 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF RADS OFFERING DOCUMENTS (.6); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/1/2011 BBN 0.80 325.00 260.00 REVIEW OF UCC FILE CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/1/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF LP RECONCILIATION BINDERS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/2/2011 HEF 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF KULISH DOCUMENTS (.7) CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF NOTES TO SCHEDULE REVISIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/2/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF LP RECONCILIATIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/3/2011 HEF 4.80 400.00 1,920.00 REVIEW OF HEDGE ARRANGEMENTS (2.4); REVIEW OF RELATED DZ BANK TRANSACTION DOCUMENTS (2.4); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/4/2011 HEF 1.90 400.00 760.00 REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS AND REVIEW AND REVISE DRAFT SWAPS PLAN PROVISION CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/5/2011 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF E-MAIL RE CAPLEASE AND REVIEW DOCUMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/5/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF REVISIONS TO SCHEDULES FROM WEST END CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/5/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF UPDATES LPACCOUNT INFO CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/8/2011 HEF 3.50 400.00 1,400.00 REVIEW NORTHLIGHT FUND LP AGREEMENTS (1.3); REVIEW DELAWARE PARTNERSHIP STATUTES (2.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/8/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF DOCKET CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/8/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF LP SPREADSHEET CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/9/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF UPDATED ACCOUNT RECONCILIATIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/10/2011 AJG 2.40 315.42 757.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES (2.4) CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/10/2011 LN 0.80 110.00 88.00 REVIEW SCHEDULES AND SPREADSHEETS FOR LS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/10/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF W.E. REAL ESTATE SCHEDULES AND AMENDMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/10/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DOCKET CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/10/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF 3/15/11 STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/10/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF JUNE 30, 2011 CONSOLIDATED ASSET & LIABILITIES STATEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/10/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL REVISIONS TO SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/11/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BAR DOCS FROM LS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/12/2011 RMS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF BAR DOCS, SERVICE LIST AND SERVICE COPY OF RADKE MOTION CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/12/2011 RMS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF AOS FROM AG AND LISTS FOR SAME AND FILING NOTICES CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/15/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SERVICE LIST CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/17/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF TRUST AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/18/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF NEW NORTH LIGHT TERM SHEET CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 35 of 61
Schedule A 7 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 8/22/2011 BBN 2.50 325.00 812.50 REVIEW OF DZ 6/8/2008 CLOSING BINDER FOR ISDA AGREEMENTS - NFA FUNDING LLC CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/22/2011 BBN 2.40 325.00 780.00 REVIEW OF DZ 6/8/2008 CLOSING BINDER FOR ISDA AGREEMENTS - NFA EQUIPMENT FUND I LP CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/22/2011 HEF 2.30 400.00 920.00 REVIEW OF ALL DOCUMENTS(2.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/22/2011 LN 0.80 110.00 88.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES FOR JULY FOR LS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/23/2011 BBN 1.30 325.00 422.50 REVIEW OF 2008 DZ BINDER FOR PRIOR WATERFALL RE: WHERE CENTURY WOULD BE POSSIBLE PRIME OF NORTHLIGHT CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/23/2011 HEF 2.20 400.00 880.00 REVIEW OF EMAILS INCLUDING 04/11/11 EMAIL TO BOB WOODS, 04/12/11 EMAIL TO MARC LOPRESTI, 05/08/11 EMAIL TO ROBERT LEINWAND (2.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/23/2011 JDD 0.60 425.00 255.00 REVIEW OF INSURANCE POLICY RE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND FRAUD ISSUE CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/23/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF JULY OP REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/23/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CONSOLIDATED ASSET LIST CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/24/2011 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF REQUEST RE CENTURY SECURITIES PLEDGEAGREEMENT AND UCC 1 FILINGS AND REVIEW FILES FOR MATERIALS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/24/2011 BBN 0.50 325.00 162.50 REVIEW OF HEF EMAILS RE DEC 2009 NORTHLIGHT CLOSING BINDER CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/24/2011 LN 0.30 110.00 33.00 REVIEWED DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FOR LS (.3). CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/24/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF HISTORY WITH AJG CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/25/2011 JDD 1.50 425.00 637.50 REVIEW OF PROPOSED DISCLOSURE STATEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/25/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF OP REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/25/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CONSOLIDATED ASSET LIST CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/26/2011 LS 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF PCEAWITH RRL CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/26/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF NOTES RE PCEA CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/29/2011 AMG 1.50 550.00 825.00 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT REPORTS ON HARD MONEY AND FRANCHISE FUNDS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/30/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF MEMO RE IBERIA BANK/CENTURY BANK LOANS CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/31/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SPREADSHEET RE NET EQUITY INTEREST - WONFF CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/31/2011 RMS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF NOTES FROM LS TO AMG ON REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/1/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF PCEA CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/9/2011 RMS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF DOCS REGARDING BUDGET AND D.S. BY LISTS WITH LS TO PREPARE FOR SERVICE AND AOS FROM LS CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/12/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF IRS NOTICES RE TAX RETURNS CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/13/2011 BBN 0.60 325.00 195.00 REVIEW OF SYSTEM FOR MEMO RE WATERFALL CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/14/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF ASSET & LIABILITIES SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/19/2011 HEF 4.90 400.00 1,960.00 REVIEW OF WEST END MORTGAGE FINANCE FUND LP AGREEMENT AND WEST END FIXED INCOME PARTNERS LP AGREEMENT AND THREE (3) NORTHLIGHT FUND LP AGREEMENTS (4.9); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/19/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CONSOLIDATED SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/19/2011 LS 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF PETITION BACKUP CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/19/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF 1007 AND ASSET/LIABILITIES SCHEDULE CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/19/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF UPDATED CONSOLIDATED SCHEDULE OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/20/2011 BBN 0.70 325.00 227.50 REVIEW OF EMAILS FOR A CROWDER/MERRILL MIPA AND DOCUMENTS FOR DAYLIGHT REPORT AND SUPPORTING SCHEDULES FOR REQUESTED DOCUMENTS AND EMAIL CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/20/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ASSET/LIABILITIES SCHEDULE FOR AUG OP REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/20/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF JUNE AND JULY OP REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/21/2011 BBN 1.70 325.00 552.50 REVIEW OF HEF MEMO RE DZ WATERFALL CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/21/2011 BBN 2.30 325.00 747.50 REVIEW OF CD OF DZ BANK JAN 2010 CLOSING FOR DETAILS REQUIRED CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/21/2011 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEWOF DZ FLOA WATERFALL LANGUAGE CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/21/2011 HEF 1.30 400.00 520.00 REVIEW OF DRAFTS OF CONSENTS FOR WEST END CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC; UC FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND WEST END FINANCIAL ADVISORS LLC (.8); REVIEW OF DRAFT OF OFFER OF SETTLEMENT OF SENTINEL (.5) CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/21/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF AUG OP REPORT WITH AMG CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/21/2011 LS 1.20 400.00 480.00 REVIEW OF IBENA STIP RE WHALER LANE PROPERTY CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/21/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULE OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 36 of 61
Schedule A 8 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 9/21/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF OP REPORTS AND BACKUP CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/22/2011 BBN 1.30 325.00 422.50 REVIEW OF ISSUE RE WATERFALL PAYMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/22/2011 HEF 2.40 400.00 960.00 REVIEW OF WEST LB CREDIT AGREEMENT (1.4) AND FILES (1 .0). CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/23/2011 HEF 1.40 400.00 560.00 REVIEW OF TRANSACTION DOCUMENTS (1.2) AND EMAILS TO AND FROM MITCHELL GREENE AND FRED RINGEL (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/23/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/26/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF PCEA CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/26/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RETURN MAIL CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/27/2011 HEF 0.90 400.00 360.00 REVIEW OF FILE DOCUMENTS AND PROPOSED SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT (.9); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/27/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DOCKETS RE FILING DATES CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/27/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF E-FILING RULES RE SERVICE VIA EMAIL CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/28/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF EMAILS FROM HESLIN REGARDING REQUESTED CHANGES TO POST-CONFIRMATION AGREEMENT (0.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/28/2011 HEF 1.40 400.00 560.00 REVIEW OF EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION AGREEMENT (.4); REVIEW OF AMAGANSETT GOVERNANCE DOCUMENTS (.8); AND EMAILS TO AND FROM DON DEVITT (.2) CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/28/2011 HEF 1.20 400.00 480.00 REVIEW OF W/E MORTGAGE OPPORTUNITY FUND FILE DOCUMENTS (1.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/28/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF PCEA CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/30/2011 HEF 2.80 400.00 1,120.00 REVIEW OF DECEMBER 18, 2009 SECOND AMENDMENT TO WESTLB CREDIT AGREEMENT (1 .0) AND 09/21/07 WESTLB CREDIT AGREEMENT (1.8) CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/30/2011 HEF 2.80 400.00 1,120.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT LP AGREEMENTS AND LOAN AGREEMENT (2.8); CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/3/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF FIORETTI CV--CANDIDATE FOR PA POSITION FROM COMMITTEE CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/3/2011 FBR 1.80 475 855.00 REVIEW OF SECOND AMENDED NOTE FOR REAL ESTATE FUND TO PREPARE DISCUSSION OF WATERFALL CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/3/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/3/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ASSET LIST CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/3/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF AUG OP REPORT FOR ECF AND UST CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/4/2011 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF WEST LB PDF CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/5/2011 AJG 1.50 315.42 473.12 REVIEW OF NUMBERS WITH AMG AND FBR FOR PROJECTIONS ON DISCO STATEMENTS (1.2) REVIEWED REORG VS LIQUIDATING OPTION WITH FBR (1.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/5/2011 BBN 1.10 325.00 357.50 REVIEW OF ISDA MASTER HEDGE AGREEMENT AND NOTE RE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLETE AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/5/2011 HEF 2.80 400.00 1,120.00 REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (2.8) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/6/2011 AJG 2.20 315.42 693.91 REVIEW OF TREASURY REGULATIONS RE LIQUIDATING TRUST AND 5 YR TIME LIMITS CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/6/2011 BBN 1.80 325.00 585.00 REVIEW OF HEF DISCLOSURE STMT RE WEST LB WATERFALL CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/6/2011 BBN 2.60 325.00 845.00 REVIEW OF WEST LB 2007 CREDIT AND SECURITY AGREEMENT FOR KEY TERMS OF LOAN CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/6/2011 BBN 0.70 325.00 227.50 REVIEW OF NOTES RE WEST LB FACILITY AND PARTIES CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/6/2011 BBN 1.70 325.00 552.50 REVIEW OF WEST LB 2007 PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR TERMS OF MORTGAGE LOAN PURCHASE BETWEEN MERCURY AND MCC CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/7/2011 BBN 2.10 325.00 682.50 REVIEW OF SECOND AMENDMENT TO CREDIT FACILITY CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/7/2011 HEF 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF REVISED DRAFT. (.5) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/10/2011 BBN 0.60 325.00 195.00 REVIEWOF DISCLOSURE STATEMENT CIRCULATED RE HISTORY CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/10/2011 FBR 1.10 475 522.50 REVIEW OF PA CANDIDATE RESUMES AND CV AND TRANSMIT TO HESLIN CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/10/2011 HEF 1.20 400.00 480.00 REVIEW DOCUMENTS PROVIDED BY KOUFFMAN (.4); REVIEW OF AMAGANSETT REALTY GROUP, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT (.4); AND AMAGANSETT REALTY HOLDINGS LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT (.4) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/10/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF 15 SOUTHWOOD COURT CONTRACT AND RIDER CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/10/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF APPRAISERS CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 37 of 61
Schedule A 9 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 10/11/2011 HEF 1.40 400.00 560.00 REVIEW OF NORTHLiGHT LOAN & LPAGMTS (1.4) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/11/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES RE SOUTHWOOD COURT OWNERSHIP; PARCELS AND MORTGAGES CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/11/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF TRUSTEE GUIDELINES RE FEE SCHEDULE CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/12/2011 AJG 1.10 315.42 346.96 REVIEW OF WATERFALL SERVING REPORTS FOR AMOUNT OF INTEREST NL HAS TAKEN OUT OVER THE LAST 8 MONTHS RE PROJECTIONS (1.1) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/12/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/13/2011 AJG 4.30 315.42 1,356.29 REVIEW OF DUTY OF CARE DEL CASES CONCERNING GP'S. (4.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/14/2011 HEF 1.20 400.00 480.00 REVIEW OF WESTLB LOAN DOCUMENTS (1.2). CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/14/2011 HEF 1.30 400.00 520.00 REVIEW DZ BANK LOAN AND NORTHLIGHT LP AGREEMENTS (1.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/14/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/14/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF LP SPREADSHEET RE CONTACT INFORMATION CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/14/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SOUTHWOOD COURT APPRAISALS CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/17/2011 AJG 1.30 315.42 410.04 REVIEW OF NL LEGAL BILLS CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/17/2011 BBN 2.40 325.00 780.00 REVIEW OF DZ BANK CONFIRMATION FOR HEDGE AGREEMENTS AND REVIEW NOTES ON ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT TERMS WITH RESPECT TO NEW YORK AND LONDON TERMS CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/17/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF PROPOSALS FOR PA INCENTIVES (0.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/18/2011 BBN 0.30 325.00 97.50 REVIEW OF RESPONSE RE REQUEST FOR REFERENCE NUMBER LIST AND UNDERLYING LOAN CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/18/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ASSIGNMENT TO WESOP CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/18/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF WESOP SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/19/2011 BBN 0.50 325.00 162.50 REVIEW OF NOTES ON WESTLB FACILITY FROM FILE RE DISCO CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/19/2011 BBN 1.70 325.00 552.50 REVIEW OF FIRST AMENDMENT AND DRAFT NOTES RE KEY POINTS RE DISCO CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/19/2011 BBN 0.80 325.00 260.00 REVIEW OF DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND HIGHLIGHT REFERENCES TO MISSING FIRST AMENDMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/19/2011 HEF 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF FIRST AMENDMENT TO WESTLB CREDIT AGREEMENT AND CONFERENCE WITH BRENDA NATARAJAN (.4 CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/19/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS FILED AND LETTERS TO COURT CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/20/2011 BBN 0.80 325.00 260.00 REVIEW OF FIRST AND SECOND AMENDMENT FOR POSSIBLE EXPLANATION OF INCONSISTENCIES RE WEST LB CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/20/2011 BBN 0.30 325.00 97.50 REVIEW DRAFT AND REDLINE OF WEST LB DISCLOSURE STATEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/20/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SERVICE LIST & UPDATED ADDRESSES CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/21/2011 HEF 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF NEW DRAFT OF WESTLB WATERFALL SUMMARY FROM BRENDA NATARAJAN. CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/24/2011 AJG 3.00 315.42 946.25 REVIEW OF N/L LEGAL BILLS FOR REASONABLENESS (1.9); REVIEW OF LOPRESTI POST PETITION BILLS FOR REASONABLENESS(1.1 ) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/24/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF SIX MONTH POST CONFIRMATION BUDGET REQUESTED BY NORTHLIGHT CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/26/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF SEC DECISION ON GOULD CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/27/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RELEASE WITH HEF CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/27/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SIGNATURES FOR RELEASE WITH HEF CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/27/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF SEPTEMBER OPERATING REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/27/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF REVISED SEPTEMBER OPERATING REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/27/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF WEFA & WESOP SCHEDULES RE SOUTHWOOD COURT, LLC INT & MORTGAGE CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/27/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DISCO RE SW COURT MORTGAGE CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/28/2011 HEF 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF SOUTHWOOD COURT RELEASE CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/31/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF HESLIN EXECUTION PAGES ON STIPIRELEASE CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/1/2011 HEF 1.30 400.00 520.00 REVIEW OF AUGUST 19, 2010 SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT AND RELATED DOCUMENTS (1.0); REVIEW OF DECEMBER 1, 2005 ASSIGNMENT (.3); CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/1/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SUBORDINATION AGT CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 38 of 61
Schedule A 10 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 11/7/2011 AJG 1.10 315.42 346.96 REVIEWED NEW CASH COLLATERAL STIP FROM N/L. CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/8/2011 RRL 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF COURT TRANSCRIPT RE 11/8 HEARING CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/15/2011 RRL 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF ALLOCUTION OF ISRAEL AND MADOFF RE: MEETING WITH LANDBERG'S LAWYER CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/18/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF LANDBERG PLEA CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/18/2011 AJG 0.60 315.42 189.25 REVIEW OF LANDBERG PLEA CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/21/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF LANDBERG PLEA CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/21/2011 AJG 0.60 315.42 189.25 REVIEWED THE CRANDEL SETTLEMENT WITH THE SEC,(.6) CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/22/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF OCTOBER OPERATING REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/23/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CALENDAR CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/29/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF TRANSCRIPT OF SEC SETTLEMENT WITH LANDBERG (.8); CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/29/2011 AJG 0.80 315.42 252.33 REVIEW OF KRAMER'S DEAL WITH THE SEC RE INSURANCE AND HIS RIGHT TO THE POLICY. (.8) CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/30/2011 AJG 2.80 315.42 883.16 REVIEW OF DOCS WITH CLIENT TO EXPLAIN ALL CHANGES AND MADE HIS LAST EDITS (2.8) CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/1/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT OF KRAMER STAY MOTION CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/1/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULING ORDER CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/1/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF OCTOBER OPERATING REPORT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/1/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF SEPT OP REPORT TO COMPARE WITH OCTOBER CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/5/2011 AJG 2.40 315.42 757.00 REVIEW OF DEFAULTS OF LOANS IN FRANCHISE FUND. REVIEW OF LOAN AGREEMENTS (2.4) CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/9/2011 AMG 1.00 550.00 550.00 REVIEW OF LETTER TO PROSECUTOR FROM RAY AND MOORE REVISIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF EMAIL TO RAY AND NORTH LIGHT REGARDING DEFAULT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 AJG 1.30 315.42 410.04 REVIEW OF DZ LOAN AGREEMENT (1.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/20/2011 HEF 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF IVYWOOD LLC AGREEMENT FOR SALE OF MEMBERSHIP AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/22/2011 AJG 1.00 315.42 315.42 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT LOAN DOCS (1.0) CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/22/2011 HEF 1.00 400.00 400.00 REVIEW OF DECEMBER 18, 2009 LOAN AGREEMENT AND ALLONGE, WITH NORTHLIGHT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/22/2011 HEF 0.90 400.00 360.00 REVIEW OF DRAFT OF NOTE. WITH NORTH LIGHT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/22/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES AND INVESTOR CREDITORS SCHEDULES CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/27/2011 AJG 2.80 315.42 883.16 REVIEW OF LOAN DOCS RELATED TO UNDERSTAND THE DEFAULTS NFA CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/28/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF RETURN MAIL CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/3/2012 HEF 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW VRP PURCHASE AGREEMENT REGARDING PASS THROUGH OF SWAP PAYMENTS RE NORTH LIGHT LOAN CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/4/2012 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF RADKE CLAIM CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/4/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ADMIN WAIVER WITH AMG CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/4/2012 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF EMAIL RE FTI FEES AND EXPENSES CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/5/2012 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF NOTES AND DIAGRAMS RE LIMITED RECOURSE FUNDS AND STRUCTURE OF DZ DEAL CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/5/2012 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SALE MOTION CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/5/2012 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF EXHIBITS TO SALE MOTION CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/6/2012 AJG 1.60 315.42 504.66 REVIEW OF RADKE FEE APPLICATION (1.6) CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/6/2012 HEF 1.40 400.00 560.00 REVIEW OF REVISED DRAFT OF FIRST AMENDMENT TO THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED FLOA. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/6/2012 HEF 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW NFA ACTION PLAN DATED NOVEMBER 30, 2011 AND UPDATED AS OF DECEMBER 21, 2011 REGARDING JRG, GILLETTE, H&B AND STEWART BROTHERS FRANCHISE LOANS AND PROPOSED COLLECTION PLANS IN RESPECT THEREOF. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/6/2012 HEF 3.40 400.00 1,360.00 REVIEW OF JUNE 11,2010 THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED FRANCHISE LOAN AGREEMENT TO DETERMINE IF ANY MECHANISM ALLOWS FOR DEFAULTED FRANCHISE LOANS TO BE RETURNED TO "ELIGIBLE LOAN" STATUS, LENDER OBLIGATIONS RESPECTING THE DECLARATION OF A DEFAULT AND ANY OTHER POTENTIAL RESPONSIVE ACTIONS TO MOST RECENT DECLARATION OF DEFAULT BY DZ BANK. CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 39 of 61
Schedule A 11 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 1/6/2012 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF AOS FOR AMG REGARDING HEARINGS CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/8/2012 HEF 3.00 400.00 1,200.00 REVIEW REVISED DRAFT OF LOAN AGREEMENT FROM KASOWITZ BENSON FIRM CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/9/2012 AMG 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT DOCUMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/9/2012 HEF 1.10 400.00 440.00 REVIEW OF REVISED DRAFT OF NEW NORTH LIGHT PLEDGE AGREEMENT FROM KASOWITZ BENSON LAW FIRM. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/10/2012 AJG 2.20 315.42 693.91 REVIEW OF RECENT CASE LAW RE INSURANCE SETILEMENT E.G 11 CIRCUIT RULING(.6); AND BRIEFS (1.6) RELATION BACK RE SENTINEL INSURANCE POLICY CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/10/2012 HEF 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF EMAILS FROM ADAM GREENE RE IBERIA (.2); AND JOHN BOUGIAMAS RE IBERIA (.2) CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/10/2012 HEF 2.40 400.00 960.00 REVIEW JANUARY 26, 2010 SERVICING AGREEMENT FOR RESPONSIVE ACTIONS TO DZ CLAIM OF DEFAULTED FRANCHISE LOANS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/10/2012 HEF 2.20 400.00 880.00 REVIEW EXHIBIT E- POST-CONFIRMATION ESTATE AGREEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH NEW IBERIA BANK LOAN DOCUMENTS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/11/2012 AJG 2.10 315.42 662.37 REVIEW OF NL SERVICING REPORT FOR LATEST UPDATE RE FRANCHISE DEFAULTS (1.8) REVIEW OF PROJECTIONS RE FRANCHISE FUND IN PLAN SUPPLEMENT IN LIGHT OF DEFAULTS (.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/11/2012 HEF 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF DRAFT OF SCHEDULE 3.1 (A) TO LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT FROM KASOWITZ BENSON CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/11/2012 HEF 1.60 400.00 640.00 REVIEW OF JUNE 2008 NATIONAL FRANCHISE ACCEPTANCE, LLC SERVICING GUIDELINES FOR PROSPECTIVE CLAIMS AGAINST NFA REGARDING NEW DEFAULT LOANS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/12/2012 HEF 1.60 400.00 640.00 REVIEW OTTERBOURG DRAFT OF IBERIA BANK PLEDGE AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/13/2012 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF SEC LETTER REGARDING GOULD SUIT CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/13/2012 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/13/2012 BBN 1.00 325.00 325.00 REVIEW OF DZ BANK 1/2010 CLOSING BINDER FOR SERVICING GUIDELINES CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/13/2012 BBN 1.20 325.00 390.00 REVIEW OF DZ BANK 6/2008 CLOSING BINDER FOR SERVICING GUIDELINES CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/13/2012 HEF 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SECTION 2.2(B) OF IBERIA LOAN AGREEMENT (0.2) CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/16/2012 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF HESLIN PROFER CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/16/2012 HEF 2.40 400.00 960.00 REVIEW REVISED DRAFT OF NEW IBERIA BANK LOAN AGREEMENT FROM IBERIA'S COUNSEL. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/17/2012 BBN 0.20 325.00 65.00 REVIEW LOAN SERVICING GUIDELINES IN DZ BANK 2008 BINDER RE: NFA DEFAULTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/17/2012 BBN 0.70 325.00 227.50 REVIEW OF DZ BANK 2008 BINDER FOR SERVICING GUIDELINES FOR NFA AND NFA II LOANS CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/17/2012 HEF 1.60 400.00 640.00 REVIEW NORTH LIGHT COMMENTS TO NEW IBERIA LOAN DOCUMENTS AND INTER-CREDITOR PROVISIONS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/18/2012 HEF 1.00 400.00 400.00 REVIEW OF REVISED DRAFT OF IBERIA LOAN AGREEMENT FROM IBERIA'S COUNSEL (1.0); CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/18/2012 HEF 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF REVISED DRAFT OF IBERIA PLEDGE AGREEMENT FROM IBERIA'S COUNSEL CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/18/2012 HEF 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF REVISED IBERIA PROMISSORY NOTE [0.5] CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/18/2012 HEF 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF SECOND REVISED DRAFT OF IBERIA LOAN AGREEMENT FROM MATT MILLER. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/20/2012 AJG 0.80 315.42 252.33 REVIEW TURN OF IBERIA LOAN DOC SENT BY IBERIA CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/20/2012 HEF 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT COMMENTS TO LOAN DOCUMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/20/2012 HEF 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF REVISED CAPLEASE CREDIT AND SECURITY AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/23/2012 AJG 1.20 315.42 378.50 REVIEW OF MARK UP OF IBERIA LOAN DOCS(1.2) CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/23/2012 HEF 1.00 400.00 400.00 REVIEW REVISED DRAFT OF NEW IBERIA PLEDGE AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/23/2012 HEF 1.60 400.00 640.00 REVIEW REVISED DRAFT OF NEW IBERIA LOAN AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/23/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF WUPAC CORRESPONDENCE CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/23/2012 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF DOCKET CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/23/2012 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF NOV AND DEC OP REPORTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 40 of 61
Schedule A 12 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 1/24/2012 HEF 2.40 400.00 960.00 REVIEW FRANCHISE LOAN SERVICING GUIDELINES REGARDING PROSPECTIVE CLAIM VS NATIONAL FRANCHISE ACCEPTANCE, LLC CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/24/2012 KS 0.50 201.35 100.68 REVIEW MORS, REVISE, DISCUSS WITH LS AND HAVE HESLIN EXECUTE CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/24/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF UST INVOICES CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/24/2012 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF DOCKETS AND CASE CLOSING FLAGS CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/25/2012 HEF 1.00 400.00 400.00 REVIEW REVISED DRAFT OF IBERIA LOAN AGREEMENT. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/25/2012 HEF 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW REVISED DRAFT OF IBERIA PLEDGE AGREEMENT. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/25/2012 HEF 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW REVISED DRAFT OF IBERIA PROMISSORY NOTE. CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/29/2011 KS 0.50 201.35 100.68 REVIEW MOTION FOR SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION RE ISSUES WITH NON DEBTOR ENTITES (.5) CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 5/19/2011 AMG 1.00 550.00 550.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA DISPUTED CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 6/1/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF RELIEF FROM STAY STIPULATION REGARDING IBERIA CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 6/1/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF MEMO REGARDING IBERIA, UCC AND AVOIDANCE OF CLAIM CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 6/1/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CLASS ACTION CORRESP/CLAIM NOTICE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 6/8/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA/CENTURY BACK UP REGARDING VOID SECURITY INTEREST AND EQUITABLE SUBORDINATION CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 7/25/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BAR DATE ORDER & NOTICE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 7/25/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 7/27/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF BAR DATE MOTION CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 8/3/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS/CLAIMS NOTICE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 8/8/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF CAPLEASE SECURED CLAIM CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 8/8/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS REGISTERS AND CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 8/10/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 8/11/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 8/25/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS WITH LN CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 8/29/2011 AMG 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF CENTURY LOAN FILES AND DOCUMENTS REGARDING CENTURYIIBERIA DISPUTED CLAIM CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 8/29/2011 RRL 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA CLAIM CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 8/30/2011 AMG 1.60 550.00 880.00 REVIEW OF TRUST AGREEMENT (.4); PLAN (.3) AND DISCO (.9) CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 8/31/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF COMPUTATIONS (.3) CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/6/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF JANIS EMAIL AND CENTURY CLAIM (.5) CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/6/2011 FBR 3.00 475 1,425.00 REVIEW OF LOAN DOCUMENTATION RELATIVE TO PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLAIM OF IBERIA BANK (3.0); CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/7/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BAR DATE NOTICE REVISIONS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/7/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DOCKET RE BAR DATE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/7/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF FILED CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/9/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/9/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DECISIONS RE DISTRIBUTION CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/12/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS REGISTER CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/15/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS REPORT CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/15/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF BAR DATE MOTION RETURN MAIL AND MASTER SERVICE LIST CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/15/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/20/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/27/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF RAKOFF DECISION CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 9/28/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/3/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW MORTGAGE NOTE AND ASSIGNMENT REGARDING SOUTHWOOD (.6) CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/4/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS WITH CL CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/5/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES RE DATAMINING CLAIM CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/7/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/10/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/12/2011 AMG 1.30 550.00 715.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT PROOF OF CLAIM AND BACK UP CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/12/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/13/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF PROOFS OF CLAIM OF GOLDSTEIN, LANDBERG AND CRANDLE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/14/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS OF IBERIA AND NORTH LIGHT CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/14/2011 LS 0.90 400.00 360.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 41 of 61
Schedule A 13 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 10/14/2011 RRL 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEWED PROOFS OF CLAIM FILED BY: HOFFMAN, MOORE, VENTURE RESTAURANT, HESLIN, BASILE 2X, PORTER, CHRONICLES TRUST, BEY, KURZMAN, KAPLAN, SIEGEL, CONTE CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/17/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/18/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/19/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES FOR CLAIMS ANALYSIS PREP CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/19/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/21/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF PROJECTIONS FOR IBERIA SETTLEMENT CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 10/27/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF NYC PROOF OF CLAIM CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 11/14/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA SETTLEMENT CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 11/14/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA SETTLEMENT LETTER CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 11/15/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF EMAIL FOR IBERIA REGARDING SETTLEMENT CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 11/21/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF INSURANCE SETTLEMENT CASE SENT BY INSURANCE COMPANY CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 11/29/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW SEC SETTLEMENT WITH KRAMER (.6) CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 12/7/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF CONSENT FORM - ADMIN RE WAIVER CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 1/5/2012 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF INSURANCE CLAIM CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 1/5/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RADKE POC CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 1/9/2012 HEF 1.80 400.00 720.00 REVIEW NEW DRAFTS OF LOAN AGREEMENT AND PLEDGE AGREEMENT FROM KASOWITZ BENSON. CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 1/10/2012 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 1/13/2012 AMG 0.70 550.00 385.00 REVIEW OF RADKE OBJECTIONS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 1/13/2012 AJG 1.60 315.42 504.66 REVIEW OF ARENT FOX FEE APP(1.2); REVIEW OF UST GUIDELINES RE HOTEL STAYS (.2) AND TRAVEL (.2) CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 1/24/2012 KS 1.00 201.35 201.35 REVIEW FTI FEE APPLICATION CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AND OBJECTIONS 3/4/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RETENTION DOCS RE: RB. FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 4/6/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF STIPULATION RE 1M FOR PREP OF RETENTION APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 4/8/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF RETENTION PAPERS FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 5/13/2011 FBR 2.50 475 1,187.50 REVIEW OF TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS RE RADKE TESTIMONY AND RELATED ITEMS FOR OPPOSITION TO UST RETENTION OBJECTION FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 5/23/2011 FBR 0.50 475 237.50 REVIEW OF ENRON CASE TO PREP FOR HEARING ON RETENTION (0.5) FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 5/23/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF UST RETENTION OBJECTION FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 5/26/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF COMMITTEE COUNSEL RETENTION FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 5/27/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CORRESPONDENCE TO 5MB RE RETENTION FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 6/16/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF REVISED RETENTION ORDER (.2) FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 6/17/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF UST EMAIL REGARDING EXAMINER FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 6/17/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RETENTION ORDER FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 12/20/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF BILLING FOR FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 12/23/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 12/23/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF BILLING FOR FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/3/2012 LS 2.30 400.00 920.00 REVIEW OF BILLING FOR FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/4/2012 LS 2.40 400.00 960.00 REVIEW OF BILLING FOR FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/5/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RADKE RETENTION FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/6/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ARENT FOX FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/6/2012 RRL 1.80 550.00 990.00 REVIEW ARENT FOX FEE APP. (1.1); REVIEW FTI FEE APP (.7) FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/9/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF FEE APP BACKUP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/9/2012 LS 4.00 400.00 1,600.00 REVIEW OF BILLING FOR FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/10/2012 LS 2.50 400.00 1,000.00 REVIEW OF BILLING FOR FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/10/2012 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF TOGUT FEE APP MOTION SHORTENING TIME FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/10/2012 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF NOTICE OF FEE RATE CHANGES FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/11/2012 KS 0.80 201.35 161.08 REVIEW HEARING TRANSCRIPT AND DISCUSS WITH RRL FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/11/2012 LS 3.80 400.00 1,520.00 REVIEW OF BILLING FOR FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/16/2012 AMG 1.00 550.00 550.00 REVIEW OF CREDITOR COMMITTEE OBJECTION TO RADKE FEES FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/20/2012 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 PREPARATION OF SUPPLEMENT TO FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/25/2012 AMG 1.50 550.00 825.00 REVIEW OF TOGUT FEE APPLICATIONS FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/25/2012 FBR 0.40 475 190.00 REVIEW OF TOGUT FEE APPLICATION AND TOGUT SEGAL FEE APPLICATION (PRELIMINARY REVIEW)(0.4); FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 1/25/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF TOGUT FEE APP FEE/EMPLOYMENT APPLICATIONS 3/16/2011 RMS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CASH COLLATERAL DOCS AND LOAN DOCS FINANCING 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 42 of 61
Schedule A 14 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 3/17/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF LOAN DOCS FROM H.F. FOR CASH COLLATERAL FINANCING 3/18/2011 RMS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT DOCS RE: CASH COLLATERAL FINANCING 4/20/2011 FBR 1.00 475 475.00 REVIEW OF CASH COLLATERAL ORDER FINANCING 4/20/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF FINANCING RULES FOR CASH COLLATERAL FINANCING 4/25/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF REVISED CASH COLLATERAL DOCS FINANCING 4/25/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CASH COLLATERAL ORDER FINANCING 4/26/2011 LS 1.50 400.00 600.00 REVIEW OF INTERIM CASH COLLATERAL ORDER FINANCING 4/28/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF LOCAL RULES RE CASH COLLATERAL FINANCING 4/29/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT COMMENTS TO CASH COLLATERAL FINANCING 5/16/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF US TRUSTEE OBJECTIONS TO CASH COLLATERAL AND SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION FINANCING 6/1/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF INTERIM CASH COLLATERAL ORDER FINANCING 6/14/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF EMAIL FROM CREDITORS COMMITTEE ON CASH COLLATERAL FINANCING 8/29/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CASH COLLATERAL STIPULATION RE NL LIENS FINANCING 10/17/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF EMAIL ON NORTH LIGHT TERM SHEET FINANCING 10/18/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT PROPOSAL FINANCING 10/27/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF EMAIL FROM CASHER FINANCING 11/15/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF EMAIL REGARDING NORTH LIGHT ON FEE ISSUE FINANCING 1/9/2012 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF CAPLEASE LOAN DOCUMENTS FINANCING 1/16/2012 AMG 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF DECEMBER NFA FRANCHISE REPORT FINANCING 1/20/2012 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF EMAIL ON IBERIA COMMENTS TO CAPLEASE LOAN DOCUMENTS FINANCING 1/20/2012 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA (.3) AND NORTHLIGHT (.5) FINAL LOAN DOCUMENTS FINANCING 3/17/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF JUDGE CASTELL DECISION RE: RADKE'S LETTER LITIGATION 3/17/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF RADKE LETTER TO INVESTORS LITIGATION 3/17/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF RADKE'S LEITERS TO PREPARE RESPONSE LITIGATION 3/17/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SEC QUESTIONS LITIGATION 3/17/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF 2004 RULES, LOCAL RULES AND FORMS LITIGATION 3/17/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CASTEL RULING RE RADKE LETTER LITIGATION 3/17/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF RADKE EMAIL LITIGATION 3/18/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF 2004 APPLICATION LITIGATION 3/22/2011 AMG 1.50 550.00 825.00 REVIEW OF SEC JOINDER AND FISHER DECLARATION AND RELATED PAPERS LITIGATION 3/22/2011 LS 0.90 400.00 360.00 REVIEW OF UST MOTION TO APPOINT TRUSTEE AND EXHIBITS LITIGATION 3/22/2011 LS 1.20 400.00 480.00 REVIEW OF FISHER DECLARATION AND EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF TRUSTEE MOTION LITIGATION 3/22/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF MASUMOTO 9077 DOC LITIGATION 3/22/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF NOA'S FILED LITIGATION 3/22/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SEC JOINDER TO UST MOTION TO APPOINT TRUSTEE LITIGATION 3/22/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ORDER SCHEDULING EVIDENTIARY HEARING ON MOTION TO APPOINT TRUSTEE LITIGATION 3/23/2011 JDD 2.00 425.00 850.00 REVIEW OF UNITED STATES TRUSTEE'S MOTION FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A TRUSTEE LITIGATION 3/23/2011 LS 1.2 400.00 480.00 REVIEW OF UST MOTION TO APPOINT TRUSTEE LITIGATION 3/23/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF 1104(A)(l) AND (2) LANGUAGE LITIGATION 3/23/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF FISHER DOC IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO APPOINT TRUSTEE LITIGATION 3/23/2011 RRL 3.30 550.00 1,815.00 REVIEW OF UST MOTIONS AND SEC JOINDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF 1104 TRUSTEE LITIGATION 3/24/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF RADKE DECLARATION LITIGATION 3/24/2011 JDD 0.60 425.00 255.00 REVIEW OF RADKE DECLARATION LITIGATION 3/24/2011 KS 0.30 201.35 60.41 REVIEW RADKE DECLARATION (.3); LITIGATION 3/24/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF PRE-TRIAL MEMO LITIGATION 3/24/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DOCS RE: UST MOTION TO APPT TRUSTEE LITIGATION 3/25/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF EXHIBIT LIST LITIGATION 3/25/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF FILES FOR DOCSIFORMS OF FINDING OF FACTS LITIGATION 3/25/2011 RMS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF REVISED DOCS ON UST MOTION LITIGATION 3/28/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SUBPOENAS LITIGATION 3/28/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF US/ISEC WITNESS AND EXHIBITS LIST LITIGATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 43 of 61
Schedule A 15 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 3/28/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF FISHER 2ND DECLARATION AND EXHIBITS LITIGATION 3/28/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF RADKE OBJECTION TO DOC DEMAND LITIGATION 3/28/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF LOCAL RULES RE DISCOVERY DISPUTES LITIGATION 3/28/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF WATKINS' DECLARATION AND EXHIBITS LITIGATION 3/28/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF LISTS FOR COURT ON UST MOTION LITIGATION 3/28/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DOCS, LISTS FILED BY UST AND LISTS LITIGATION 3/28/2011 RRL 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF MOVANTS' EXHIBITS LITIGATION 3/29/2011 AMG 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF TRUSTEE PROPOSED FACTS LITIGATION 3/29/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF USTISEC PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT LITIGATION 3/29/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF REVISED FINDING AND FACT AND REPLY DOCS (2) LITIGATION 3/29/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF FINAL DRAFT OF SAME WITH LS LITIGATION 3/30/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF 2004 APPS LITIGATION 3/30/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF STATEMENT OF FACTS LITIGATION 4/4/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF DECISIONS GRANTING SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION LITIGATION 4/5/2011 BBN 0.70 325.00 227.50 REVIEW OF EXHIBITS FOR TRIAL LITIGATION 4/5/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF DECISIONS RE SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION LITIGATION 4/6/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION MOTIONS LITIGATION 4/7/2011 FBR 0.60 475 285.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT STIP AND EXHIBITS LITIGATION 4/7/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF STIP RE RADKE RESPONSIBILITY LITIGATION 4/11/2011 AJG 0.50 315.42 157.71 REVIEW OF ALL EXHIBIT BINDERS TO SEE WHAT WE STILL NEEDED TO INTRODUCE INTO EVIDENCE.(.5) LITIGATION 4/12/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF TRIAL NOTES LITIGATION 4/13/2011 LS 0.90 400.00 360.00 REVIEW OF SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION STANDARDS LITIGATION 4/13/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RESPONSES BY LPS TO TRUSTEE MOTION LITIGATION 4/14/2011 LP 0.60 450 270.00 REVIEW OF PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT RE SUB CON (.6) LITIGATION 4/14/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF 9006 RE EXT OF TIME TO FILE SCHEDULES AND SERVICE REQUIREMENTS LITIGATION 4/14/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF 11 04(A)(2) DECISIONS LITIGATION 4/14/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION MOTIONS LITIGATION 4/15/2011 AJG 1.10 315.42 346.96 REVIEW OF TRANSCRIPT RE: RADKE'S TESTIMONY (1.1): LITIGATION 4/15/2011 FBR 1.10 475 522.50 REVIEW OF SEC COMPLAINT RE EVIDENCE OF CO- MINGLING (0.4); REVIEW OF MADOFF PLEADINGS RE EVIDENCE FOR SUBTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION (0.7) LITIGATION 4/15/2011 RRL 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF TRANSCRIPT LITIGATION 4/18/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF RADKE LETTER TO COURT AND TO RAY LITIGATION 4/19/2011 LS 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF BACKUP TO SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION MOTION LITIGATION 4/19/2011 LS 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF PROPOSED FACTS AND 1007 LITIGATION 4/20/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF MADOFF SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION BRIEF LITIGATION 4/20/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION MOTION WITH AJG LITIGATION 4/21/2011 AJG 2.30 315.42 725.45 REVIEW OF OPERATING AGREEMENTS RE: SAME (2.3) LITIGATION 4/22/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF BILLING MEMO AND EXHIBITS LITIGATION 4/22/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF EMAILS RE BACKUP TO SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION LITIGATION 4/25/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION AFFIDAVIT & BACKUP LITIGATION 4/26/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF HESLIN AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION LITIGATION 4/27/2011 FBR 2.00 475 950.00 REVIEW OF DAYLIGHT REPORT RE SUBCON LITIGATION 4/28/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF OBJECTION TO EXTENSION TO FILE SCHEDULES LITIGATION 4/29/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION LITIGATION 4/29/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF 4001 REQUIREMENTS FOR FORM OF MOTION LITIGATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 44 of 61
Schedule A 16 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 5/2/2011 FBR 2.20 475 1,045.00 REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS FROM HESLIN REGARDING EVIDENCE SUPPORTING SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION AND CO-MINGLING (2.2); LITIGATION 5/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF APPEARANCES LITIGATION 5/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF 1007 DECLARATION LITIGATION 5/2/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF EMAllS AND BANK RECORDS REGARDING COMMINGLING FOR SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION MOTION LITIGATION 5/3/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF EMAil TO UST RE PROPOSAL ON EVIDENTIARY HEARING LITIGATION 5/3/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF COMMENTS TO SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION MOTION LITIGATION 5/4/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF HESLIN DECLARATION WITH AJG LITIGATION 5/4/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF OBJECTION TO RBLGG&G RETENTION LITIGATION 5/5/2011 FBR 0.40 475 190.00 REVIEW MOTION AND UST OBJECTION (0.4) LITIGATION 5/6/2011 JDD 0.50 425.00 212.50 REVIEW OF DRAFT OF LETTER TO JUDGE BERNSTEIN AND CONFERENCES RELATING THERETO LITIGATION 5/9/2011 FBR 1.30 475 617.50 REVIEW OF HESLIN DIRECT EXAMINATION FOR 5/10 HEARING LITIGATION 5/9/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RADKE CORRESP RE REQUEST FOR INFO ON FEES LITIGATION 5/9/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF BILLING WITH AMG FOR RESP TO RETENTION OBJECTION LITIGATION 5/10/2011 LS 0.90 400.00 360.00 REVIEW OF EVIDENTIARY BINDERS AND SPREADSHEET OF LP'S, RADS AND NOTEHOLDERS LITIGATION 5/10/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF NON-DEBTOR LIST FOR SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION MOTION LITIGATION 5/11/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION MOTION FOR CREDITOR DESIGNATIONS LITIGATION 5/11/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF LITIGATION SCHEDULES LITIGATION 5/11/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF CONTRACTS LITIGATION 5/12/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF RRL REVISIONS TO SCHEDULE DISCLAIMER LITIGATION 5/13/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF BACKUP (CHECKS; BANK RECORDS) FOR SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION MOTION LITIGATION 5/14/2011 FBR 2.30 475 1,092.50 REVIEW OF TRUSTEE TRANSCRIPTS FOR 3.31.11 AND 4.1.11 LITIGATION 5/16/2011 FBR 4.20 475 1,995.00 REVIEW OF BACKUP INFO FOR ASHLEY AND FRUITVILLE LOANS FOR USE IN SUB CON HEARING LITIGATION 5/16/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF UST OBJECTION TO SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION LITIGATION 5/17/2011 FBR 4.00 475 1,900.00 REVIEW OF BACKUP FOR FRUITVillE AND ASHLEY FURNITURE LOAN LITIGATION 5/17/2011 LS 0.90 400.00 360.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA BANK OPP TO SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION; CASH COLLATERAL & STAY MOTION LITIGATION 5/18/2011 FBR 0.80 475 380.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA BANK CASH COLLATERAL OBJECTION AND EXHIBITS TO DEVELOP DEFENSE TO RELIEF REQUESTED LITIGATION 5/18/2011 FBR 2.20 475 1,045.00 REVIEW OF DOCUMENTATION REGARDING VALIDITY OF IBERIA BANK'S SECURITY INTERESTS IN WATERFAll PAYMENTS INCLUDING REVIEW OF MEMBERSHIP INTEREST PURCHASE AGREEMENT (1 .6) AND NFA FUNDING llC llC AGREEMENT (.6) LITIGATION 5/18/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF SUBSTANTIVE CONSOLIDATION MOTION LITIGATION 5/23/2011 FBR 1.00 475 475.00 REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS RELATING TO IBERIABANK'S SECURITY INTEREST LITIGATION 5/24/2011 FBR 2.00 475 950.00 REVIEW OF DOCKETS OF SIMILAR CASES FOR EXAMPLES OF RETENTION IN SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES IN SDNY WHICH WERE APPROVED. LITIGATION 5/25/2011 AJG 0.30 315.42 94.62 REVIEWED RADKE'S LETTER TO RB (.3). LITIGATION 5/26/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF 9019 PROVISIONS RE SETTLING SEC LITIGATION AND PROCEDURE FOR NOTICE LITIGATION 6/2/2011 FBR 1.00 475 475.00 REVIEW DOCUMENTS (1.0); LITIGATION 6/3/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF DISCOVERY SUBMISSION SEC DISTRICT COURT ACTION LITIGATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 45 of 61
Schedule A 17 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 6/3/2011 FBR 2.00 475 950.00 REVIEW OF BACKUP MATERIAL ON VALUATION OF POTENTIAL FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE CLAIMS TO ASSIST FTI WITH VALUATION ISSUES LITIGATION 6/6/2011 FBR 1.00 475 475.00 REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS RELATED TO CLAW BACKS (1.0) LITIGATION 6/7/2011 FBR 1.50 475 712.50 REVIEW OF FTI RECOVERY ANALYSIS LITIGATION 6/7/2011 FBR 0.90 475 427.50 REVIEW OF DEPOSIT CONTROL ACCOUNT AGREEMENT FOR ITEREST RESERVE ACCOUNT AND COLLECTION ACCOUNT LITIGATION 6/10/2011 AJG 0.80 315.42 252.33 REVIEW OF THE GENEVA SOURCE OF FUNDS DOCUMENTS PROVIDED BY HESLlN.(.8) LITIGATION 6/13/2011 FBR 0.60 475 285.00 REVIEW OF REVISED SUB CON MOTION LITIGATION 6/13/2011 FBR 0.50 475 237.50 REVIEW OF REVISED CASH COLLATERAL ORDER FROM NORTHLIGHT LITIGATION 6/15/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF UST PROPOSED ORDER (0.2); LITIGATION 6/16/2011 FBR 1.00 475 475.00 REVIEW OF MOTION TO DISPLACE INDEPENDENT MONITORS LITIGATION 6/17/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF EXAMINER ORDER LITIGATION 6/17/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF RBL RETENTION ORDER (0.2) LITIGATION 6/17/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF FEE EXAMINER ORDER LITIGATION 6/20/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF 2004 APPLICATION AND BACKUP LITIGATION 6/21/2011 FBR 1.50 475 712.50 REVIEW OF INFO AND BACKUP ON GENEVA TRANSACTION LITIGATION 6/21/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SUBST CON SOL MOTION RE RELATED NON-DEBTORS LITIGATION 6/22/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF 2004 DRAFT APP LITIGATION 6/23/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF EXAMINER APPOINTMENT AND APPLICATION LITIGATION 6/23/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ORDER APPOINTING EXAMINER LITIGATION 6/24/2011 FBR 4.50 475 2,137.50 REVIEW OF RESEARCH REGARDING D&O PROCEEDS AS PROPERTY OF THE ESTATE; REVIEW OF 5 ARTICLES AND ENDOCSCOPY CASE, DOWNEY CASE, ADELPHIA CASE AND WORLD HEALTH CASES ON ISSUE LITIGATION 6/24/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF COLLIERS RE 2004 RESEARCH LITIGATION 6/27/2011 FBR 0.80 475 380.00 REVIEW AIG D*O POLICY COVERAGEOF LITIGATION 6/29/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF 2004 DRAFTS AND NOTES LITIGATION 7/1/2011 AJG 1.00 315.42 315.42 REVIEW OF RADKE LETTER, AND HIS DRAFT REPORT (1 .0). LITIGATION 7/1/2011 FBR 0.70 475 332.50 REVIEW OF COMMITTEE CHANGES TO COMMON INTEREST AGREEMENT AND ISSUES WITH SUB CON LITIGATION 7/1/2011 FBR 1.40 475 665.00 REVIEW OF RADKE LETTER TO KASTEL AND SUBMISSION TO DISTRICT COURT LITIGATION 7/5/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF COMMITTEE COMMENTS TO SUB CON ORDER LITIGATION 7/5/2011 FBR 0.90 475 427.50 REVIEW OF SLOANE REPORT LITIGATION 7/5/2011 RMS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF lETTER WITH MEMO ENDORSED ON SAME LITIGATION 7/8/2011 FBR 6.00 475 2,850.00 REVIEW OF SLOANE DRAFT REPORT AND PARTIAL REVIEW OF EXHIBITS LITIGATION 7/12/2011 FBR 1.00 475 475.00 REVIEW OF FTI RECOVERY ANALYSIS LITIGATION 7/13/2011 FBR 3.20 475 1,520.00 REVIEW OF DRAFT OF EXPERT REPORT LITIGATION 7/14/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF RADKE OSC LITIGATION 7/15/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF JUDGE CASTEL lETTER ORDER ON RADKE LITIGATION 7/17/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF RADKE OSC (.4); LITIGATION 7/18/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF FINAL OSC RADKE LITIGATION 7/18/2011 LS 0.90 400.00 360.00 REVIEW OF SCHEDULES/BACKUP IN PREP FOR SUBS CONSOL LITIGATION 7/19/2011 FBR 1.60 475 760.00 REVIEW OF SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT FROM RAY SLOANE FOR HEARING AND REVIEW OF ERRATA SHEET AND REVISED DIAGRAMS LITIGATION 7/19/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF LP CORRESP RE SUBS CONSOL LITIGATION 7/25/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF RADKE AND SEC RESPONSE (.6); LITIGATION 7/25/2011 AJG 2.00 315.42 630.83 REVIEWED RADKE PAPERS RE: RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (.8) REVIEWED SEC PAPERS RE: SAME (1 .2) LITIGATION 7/25/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SUBS CONSOl ORDER LITIGATION 7/26/2011 FBR 0.80 475 380.00 REVIEW OF TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING ON SUB CON LITIGATION 7/28/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF RADKE DISTRICT COURT ORDER LITIGATION 7/28/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF PROPOSED ORDER FOR JUDGE CASTEL LITIGATION 7/29/2011 FBR 0.40 475 190.00 REVIEW OF REVISED RADKE ORDER LITIGATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 46 of 61
Schedule A 18 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 8/3/2011 AJG 4.50 315.42 1,419.37 REVIEW OF ALL CASES THAT THE INSURANCE COMPANY CITED TO (4.5); LITIGATION 8/8/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF CHANGES TO AGREEMENT WITH CAPLEASE RECEIVED FROM PAUL HUGHES LITIGATION 8/8/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF RADKE DECLARATION LITIGATION 8/24/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF UST OBJ TO DS - LEHMAN IN PREP FOR WEST END DSHEARING LITIGATION 8/26/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT TREATMENT WITH RRL LITIGATION 8/31/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF PCEA LITIGATION 9/2/2011 FBR 2.30 475 1,092.50 REVIEW OF CENTURY BANK LOAN DOCUMENTS RELATIVE TO MARCH 2, 2009 LOAN LITIGATION 9/13/2011 FBR 3.50 475 1,662.50 REVIEW OF MORTGAGE SERVICER REPORTS AND PAYMENTS TO NORTHLIGHT TO DETERMINE AMOUNT OF CLAIMS AS WELL AS REVIEW ISSUES OF FEASIBILITY FOR LOAN PAYMENTS UNDER PLAN LITIGATION 9/20/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF AUGUST OP REPORTS LITIGATION 9/27/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DISCO RE SUBCON AND JT. ADMIN. ORDERS LITIGATION 9/28/2011 FBR 2.00 475 950.00 REVIEW OF RAKOFF DECISION AND LlFLAND DECISION REGARDING 546(E) ISSUE (2.0) LITIGATION 10/3/2011 AJG 2.00 315.42 630.83 REVIEWED THE COMPETING SONY RULING ON CLAWBACKS, AND "NET WINNERS' AND SIX YRS NY BS 2YS FED BANK CODE (2.0); LITIGATION 10/3/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF AMAGANSETT REAL TV NOTE EXTENSION AGREEMENT TO ADVISE REGARDING EXECUTION LITIGATION 10/10/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF DELAWARE CASE LAW RE: DUTY OF LOYALTY OWED BY GP LITIGATION 10/10/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SUB CON MOTION, ORDER AND SUPPLEMENTS LITIGATION 10/14/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF KRAMER LIFT-STAY MOTION LITIGATION 10/19/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SUBCON MOTION AND DECLARATION LITIGATION 10/27/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF DOCUMENT REQUEST (.2) LITIGATION 10/31/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SOUTHWOOD COURT STIP LITIGATION 11/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT LITIGATION 11/2/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF KRAMER STAY MOTION LITIGATION 11/3/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF KRAMER STAY MOTION AND REQUESTED RELIEF LITIGATION 11/3/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF 362 PROVISIONS IN RELATION TO KRAMER STAY MOTION LITIGATION 11/4/2011 LS 0.80 400.00 320.00 REVIEW OF STAY MOTION LITIGATION 11/4/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT OF STAY MOTION LITIGATION 11/4/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF OBJECTION TO STAY MOTION LITIGATION 11/7/2011 FBR 0.50 475 237.50 REVIEW OF TRANSCRIPT AND ORDER RE: PREP FOR STATUS CONFERENCE LITIGATION 11/9/2011 FBR 2.90 475 1,377.50 REVIEW OF TWO CLAIMS FILED BY IBERIA AND UNDERLYING DOCUMENTS (1.9) AND REVIEW OF MEMO REGARDING ATTACHMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST (1.0) RE PREP OF SECTION OF DISCO IN CASE SETTLEMENT IS NOT REACHED LITIGATION 11/9/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF CALENDAR RE UPCOMING HEARINGS AND DEADLINES LITIGATION 11/10/2011 FBR 1.60 475 760.00 REVIEW OF TRANSCRIPT FROM MARINO AND ISRAEL ALLOCUTION IN PREP FOR MEETING WITH LANDBERG'S COUNSEL LITIGATION 11/16/2011 FBR 0.60 475 285.00 REVIEW OF PROJECTIONS AND FEASIBILITY ISSUES FOR HEARINGS LITIGATION 11/21/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF SEC SETTLEMENT PAPERS LITIGATION 11/21/2011 JDD 0.20 425.00 85.00 REVIEW OF INSURANCE CASE RE SETTLEMENT AND 9019 MOTION LITIGATION 11/28/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF KRAMER STAY MOTION LITIGATION 1/4/2012 FBR 0.60 475 285.00 REVIEW OF MATERIALS FORWARDED FROM FRED STEVENS FROM JIM GUY REGARDING INQUIRIES ON CONFIRMATION ISSUES (0.6 LITIGATION 1/5/2012 AMG 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF DZ PORTFOLIO AND LOAN DOCUMENTS REGARDING DEFAULT AND SETILEMENT STIPULATION LITIGATION 1/6/2012 RRL 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW COMMITIEE FEE APP. LITIGATION 1/11/2012 JDD 1.10 425.00 467.50 REVIEW OF POLICY AND DISCUSSION WITH AMG RE PREPARATION FOR CONFERENCE LITIGATION 4/13/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DOCKET RE 341 MEETING MEETINGS OF CREDITORS/STATUS HEARINGS 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 47 of 61
Schedule A 19 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 4/5/2011 FBR 1.80 475 855.00 REVIEW OF FIRST DRAFT PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 4/5/2011 FBR 2.00 475 950.00 REVIEW OF RAD AT REQUEST OF AMG TO DETERMINE IF THEY MERIT A SEPARATE CLASSIFICATION IN THE PLAN; REVIEW OF 5%,6%,8% AND 10% RAD (2.0); PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 4/19/2011 AMG 1.00 550.00 550.00 REVIEW OF PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 4/20/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/4/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF DRAFT OF PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/18/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 6/27/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF EXCLUSIVITY ORDER PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/2/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF FILING DATES FOR PLAN AND DISCO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/5/2011 FBR 1.10 475 522.50 REVIEW OF CASHER PLAN PROPOSAL-REVIEW DRAFT LANGUAGE PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/15/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF FBR NOTES RE PLAN AND DISCO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/16/2011 LS 0.70 400.00 280.00 REVIEW OF PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/16/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF FBR NOTES RE DISCO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/18/2011 LS 2.60 400.00 1,040.00 REVIEW OF PLAN WITH RRL PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/18/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF POST-CONFIRMATION TRUST AGREEMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/18/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF TRUST AGREEMENT WITH RRL PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/23/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF PROVISIONS TO PLAN AND D.S. WITH LS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/26/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/26/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF DISCO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/29/2011 FBR 1.10 475 522.50 REVIEW OF REQUESTED CHANGES MADE TO POST CONFIRMATION ESTATE AGREEMENT BY AMG (1 .1); PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/29/2011 FBR 0.90 475 427.50 REVIEW OF HESLIN COMMENTS ON DISCO (0.5) AND REVIEW AND REVISE DISCO TO INCORPORATE CHANGES (.4) PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/29/2011 FBR 0.60 475 285.00 REVIEW OF REVISED PLAN (.6); PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/29/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/29/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF HESLIN COMMENTS TO DISCO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/29/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF FBR RESPONSE RE CLARIFICATION OF IBERIA TREATMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/30/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF RAY'S COMMENTS TO DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/30/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF HESLIN COMMENTS TO DISCO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/30/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF HESLIN COMMENTS TO PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/30/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF ASSET CHART - DISCO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/30/2011 LS 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF PLAN AND DISCO WITH FBR PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 8/31/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF FINAL D.S. AND TRUST DOCUMENTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/1/2011 FBR 2.20 475 1,045.00 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT LOAN DOCUMENTS REGARDING TREATMENT OF EXCESS WATERFALL PAYMENTS AND POSSIBLE CHANGE IN TREATMENT UNDER PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/1/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF PLAN & DISCO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/6/2011 FBR 0.50 475 237.50 REVIEW OF CV'S FROM PLAN ADMINISTRATOR CANDIDATES SUGGESTED BY COMMITTEE PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/6/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/6/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF EMAIL RE PLAN REVISIONS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/6/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF DISCO RE SCHEDULE OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/7/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF CENTURYIIBERIA SET OFF CLAIMS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/7/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF LOCAL RULES RE PLAN & DISCO AND SCHEDULING CONFERENCE HEARING PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/8/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF PLANIDISCO AND SEC NOTES AND REVISIONS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/9/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF PROJECTIONS, LIQ ANALYSIS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/12/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF LIQUIDATION ANALYSIS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/12/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF LIQUIDATION ANALYSIS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/12/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF PROJECTIONS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/12/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DISCO RE ASSETS AND CLAIMS TABLE PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/13/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF PROJECTIONS - REVISED PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/13/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF LIQUIDATION ANALYSIS - REVISED PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/14/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF ESTIMATED RECOVERY ANALYSIS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/15/2011 FBR 0.70 475 332.50 REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS FROM NORTHLIGHT REGARDING FRANCHISE LOAN MATURITIES AND DISPOSITION OF NFA FUNDS (AS DEFINED IN CASH COLLATERAL STIP (0.7); PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/16/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF CORNEAU'S ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON POST-CONFIRMATION ESTATE (0.3); PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/20/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF PROPOSED PLAN ADMINISTRATOR CVS FROM FRED STEVENS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 48 of 61
Schedule A 20 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 9/22/2011 FBR 0.90 475 427.50 REVIEW OF PROPOSAL FROM NORTHLIGHT REGARDING PLAN TREATMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/27/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF REVISIONS TO DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/27/2011 RRL 1.10 550.00 605.00 REVIEW OF REVISED PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/28/2011 FBR 1.20 475 570.00 REVIEW OF NL PROPOSAL AND DISCUSS ISSUES WITH AMG IN PREP FOR CALL TO CASHER AND STEIN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/28/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF DISCO REVISIONS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 9/28/2011 RRL 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT OFFER AND DISC WITH AMG RE NORTH LIGHT TREATMENT UNDER PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/3/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DISCO RE ASSET LIST PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/6/2011 FBR 0.50 475 237.50 REVIEW OF REV PROC 94.45 PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/6/2011 FBR 0.40 475 190.00 REVIEW OF REVISED MCC WATERFALL DESCRIPTION (0.4) PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/10/2011 LS 0.10 400.00 40.00 REVIEW OF PLAN, DISCO RE EXHIBIT FILING DEADLINE PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/10/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF PLAN & DISCO RE PLAN SUPPLEMENT PROVISIONS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/11/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF PLAN/DISCO RE PLAN SUPPLEMENT INFO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/17/2011 FBR 2.00 475 950.00 REVIEW OF NL PLAN PROPOSAL PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/17/2011 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF DISCO - REVISED PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/18/2011 FBR 0.40 475 190.00 REVIEW OF PROJECTIONS FOR PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/18/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF REVISED TERM SHEET FROM NORTHLIGHT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/18/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF COMMITTEE COMMENTS TO DISCO AND PCEA PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/19/2011 FBR 0.60 475 285.00 REVIEW OF FIRST AMENDMENT TO WEST LB NOTE TO DETERMINE IF MODIFICATIONS TO DISCLOSURE STATEMENT WERE NECESSARY PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/20/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF REVISED PROJECTIONS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/20/2011 MEB 0.60 500.00 300.00 REVIEW OF BBN WATERFALL DESCRIPTION RE DISCO STATEMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/24/2011 FBR 0.40 475 190.00 REVIEW OF FINAL CHANGES TO NL TERM SHEET PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/27/2011 FBR 0.30 475 142.50 REVIEW OF REVISION TO PLAN FROM CASHER PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/28/2011 FBR 2.30 475 1,092.50 REVIEW OF NL PROPOSED CHANGES TO PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 10/31/2011 FBR 0.90 475 427.50 REVIEW OF COMMENTS FROM CASHER ON FIRST AMENDED PLAN (.9) PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/4/2011 AMG 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF AMENDED PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/8/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF AMENDED PLAN AND NORTHLIGHT EMAIL PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/8/2011 FBR 0.40 475 190.00 REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT COMMENTS TO PLAN (0.4); PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/9/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF AMENDED PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/9/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF AMENDED TRUST AGREEMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/10/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF AMENDED D.S. (.3) ;AND TRUST (.1) PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/13/2011 FBR 0.40 475 190.00 REVIEW OF KASSOWITZ COMMENTS ON PLAN PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/14/2011 AMG 0.80 550.00 440.00 REVIEW OF AMENDED PLAN (.3); AND D.S. (.5) PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/14/2011 AMG 0.70 550.00 385.00 REVIEW OF AMENDED TRUST AGREEMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/15/2011 AMG 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF ALL AMENDED DOCUMENTS FOR FILING PLAN (.3); DISCLOSURE STATEMENT (.3); AND TRUST DOCUMENT (.6) PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/15/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF REVISED IBERIA BANK LEITER PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/17/2011 AMG 1.20 550.00 660.00 REVIEW OF AMENDED PLAN, D.S. AND TRUST DOCUMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/17/2011 AMG 0.20 550.00 110.00 REVIEW OF EMAIL ON POC ADDITIONAL MEMBERS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/17/2011 FBR 0.90 475 427.50 REVIEW NL COMMENTS (0.4); REVIEW COMMIITEE COMMENTS (0.5) PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/18/2011 AMG 0.30 550.00 165.00 REVIEW OF SEC COMMENTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/18/2011 AMG 0.50 550.00 275.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT OBJECTION TO D.S. PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/21/2011 AMG 0.60 550.00 330.00 REVIEW OF AND REVISE D.S. PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/21/2011 AMG 0.40 550.00 220.00 REVIEW OF FOGERTY OBJECTION PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/23/2011 FBR 0.40 475 190.00 REVIEW OF STEINS COMMENTS AND JACOBSON COMMENTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/30/2011 AMG 0.10 550.00 55.00 REVIEW OF IBERIA TREATMENT RE:PLAN (.1) PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/30/2011 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF BRIAN'S COMMENTS ON REVISIONS TO DISCO (0.2); PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/30/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF PLAN & DISCO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11/30/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF DOCKET PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/7/2011 LS 0.50 400.00 200.00 REVIEW OF PLAN, DISCO AND EXHIBITS WITH AJG FOR PREPARING SOLICIT PACKAGE PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 49 of 61
Schedule A 21 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 12/12/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF SOLICITATION DOCS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/13/2011 LS 1.40 400.00 560.00 REVIEW OF SOLICITATION MATERIALS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/13/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF PLAN AND DISCO RE EXHIBITS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/15/2011 FBR 1.20 475 570.00 REVIEW OF FINAL REVIEW OF SOLICITAION PACKAGE INCLUDING DISCO, PLAN, PLAN SUPPLEMENT EXHIBITS, POST0-CONFIRMATION ESTATE AGREEMENT; BALLOTS AND NOTICE OF NON-VOTING STATUS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/19/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF AOS RE SOLIC PACKAGE PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/20/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SOLIC PACKAGE & SERVICE LIST PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/23/2011 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/27/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/28/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/29/2011 FBR 0.80 475 380.00 REVIEW OF HEF'S COMMENTS ON NL NOTE AND LOAN AGREEMENT PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/30/2011 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/6/2012 FBR 0.60 475 285.00 REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT PROPOSED PLAN MODIFICATIONS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/6/2012 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW OF CHANGES TO PLAN REQUESTED BY MILBANK TWEED REPRESENTING CERTAIN INVESTORS (0.2); PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/6/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/6/2012 RMS 3.80 400.00 1,520.00 REVIEW OF DOCS FOR FEE APPLICATIONS REGARDING BILLINGS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/9/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/11/2012 LS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/13/2012 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF CLAIMS AND APPLICATIONS FILED WITH COURT REGARDING FEES AND DOC PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/17/2012 LS 0.40 400.00 160.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/18/2012 LS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF BALLOTS PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/23/2012 FBR 0.20 475 95.00 REVIEW BLACK LINE (0.2); PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1/23/2012 FBR 0.40 475 190.00 REVIEW OF COMMITTEE CLASSIFICATION MEMO PLAN AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 3/8/2011 HEF 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF PROPOSED FILINGS INCLUDING REVIEW TRANSACTION DOCUMENT LITIGATION SCHEDULES (.3) CASE PREPARATION 3/9/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DOCS WITH LS REGARDING SAME CASE PREPARATION 3/15/2011 HEF 1.00 400.00 400.00 REVIEW OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHART (1.0); CASE PREPARATION 3/15/2011 RMS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF DOCS AND PETITIONS FOR FILING CASE PREPARATION 3/16/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF DOCKETS REGARDING ASSIGNMENTS AND CASE CASE PREPARATION 3/23/2011 HEF 0.60 400.00 240.00 REVIEW OF FILE FOR TRANSCRIPT OF INVESTORS MEETING (.6) CASE PREPARATION 3/22/2011 RMS 0.30 400.00 120.00 REVIEW OF UST MOTION TO APPOINT OR CONVERT DISMISSAL, VENUE, ABSTENTION, AND WITHDRAWAL 3/22/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF SEC DOCS IN SUPPORT OF UST DOCS DISMISSAL, VENUE, ABSTENTION, AND WITHDRAWAL 3/23/2011 RMS 0.20 400.00 80.00 REVIEW OF PORTIONS OF REPLY TO UST MOTION DISMISSAL, VENUE, ABSTENTION, AND WITHDRAWAL 678.00 282,541.69 ATTORNEY BLENDED RATE AMG 550 AJG 315.4151851 BBN 325 FBR 475 HFF 400 JDD 425 KS 201.3524937 LN 110 LP 450 LS 400 MEB 500 RMS 400 RRL 550 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 50 of 61
Schedule B 1 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 3/9/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO INQUIRIES FROM MERRILL INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH MITCH GREENE AND BRENDA NATARAJAN CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/10/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO MERRILL INQUIRIES INCLUDING REVIEW OF FILE INFORMATION CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/14/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO MERRILL INQUIRIES INCLUDING TELEPHONE CALL WITH MITCH GREENE AND EMAIL TO RAY HESLIN ON SAME CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/21/2011 HEF 1.0 $400.00 $400.00 ATTENTION TO BANKING MATTERS INCLUDING REVIEW OF FILE DOCUMENTS AND TELEPHONE CALLS (1.0);, CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/22/2011 HEF 1.8 $400.00 $720.00 ATTENTION TO BANKING ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF FILE DOCUMENTS (1.8) CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/23/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO OPERATIONAL ISSUES INCLUDING TELEPHONE CALLS WITH, AND EMAILS TO AND FROM, CAROL GLOSPIE (NEWCO SERVICES) (.3); CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/25/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO REQUESTS FROM DON DEVITT RE: NFA INCLUDING TELEPHONE CALL FROM DON DEVITT (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/31/2011 HEF 1.7 $400.00 $680.00 ATTENTION TO GENERAL PARTNER AND MANAGER ELECTION ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF GOVERNANCE DOCUMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/6/2011 HEF 0.8 $400.00 $320.00 ATTENTION TO NFAlNORTHLIGHT SWAPS AND OTHER PAYMENTS ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF EMAILS FROM DON DEVITT AND MITCHELL GREENE (.8); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/7/2011 HEF 1.0 $400.00 $400.00 ATTENTION TO SWAPS ISSUED BY NORTHLIGHT INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FRO BOB WOODS, DON DEVITT AND A. MITCHELL GREENE CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/7/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO MERRILL SERVICING FEES ISSUE INCLUDING EMAIL FROM ALAN PLESKOW (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/11/2011 HEF 0.7 $400.00 $280.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT ARRANGEMENT INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH ADAM GREENE (.7); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/12/2011 HEF 1.2 $400.00 $480.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT DISPUTE RE SWAPS AND OTHER PAYMENTS INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH RAY HESLIN AND A MITCHELL GREENE (1.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/13/2011 HEF 0.7 $400.00 $280.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT SWAPS ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH A MITCHELL GREENE (.7); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/13/2011 HEF 2.8 $400.00 $1,120.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES RAISED RE: OPERATING AGREEMENTS & VOTING PROVISIONS IN BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE'S MOTION INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH A. MITCHELL GREENE; ROBERT R. LEINWAND AND ADAM J. GREENE (2.8); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/14/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO NFA SWAPS ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH A. MITCHELL GREENE RE: NL COLLATERAL (.5); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/14/2011 HEF 0.1 $400.00 $40.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES RAISED BY JUDGE BERNSTEIN REGARDING RAY HESLIN MANAGEMENT OF UC FAMILY LP AND WEST END FUNDS INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH A. MITCHELL GREENE, ROBERT R. LEINWAND AND KAVNEET SETHI CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/15/2011 HEF 0.6 $400.00 $240.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES REGARDING WEST END CASH LIQUIDITY FUND INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH A. MITCHELL GREENE AND RAY HESLIN (.6); CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 51 of 61
Schedule B 2 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 4/15/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUE RAISED BY JUDGE BERNSTEIN REGARDING LIMITATIONS ON LIMITED PARTNERS FROM HAVING MANAGEMENT ROLES IN WEST END ENTITIES INCLUDING REVIEW OF APRIL 12, 2011 TRANSCRIPT (1.1) CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/17/2011 HEF 2.1 $400.00 $840.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES RAISED BY JUDGE BERNSTEIN INCLUDING PROOFREAD AND REVISE FIRST DRAFT OF MEMO ADDRESSING PRESUMED INTERIM NATURE OF RAY HESLIN APPOINTMENT AND SUPPOSED LIMITATIONS ON LIMITED PARTNERS HOLDING CONTROL POSITIONS IN WEST END FUNDS CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/18/2011 HEF 0.6 $400.00 $240.00 ATTENTION TO SWAPS ISSUES INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM RYAN LUSIC (NFA LOANS), RAY HESLIN, DON DEVITT, A. MITCHELL GREENE AND JAYAN KRISHNAN (DZ BANK) (.6) CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/18/2011 HEF 3.3 $400.00 $1,320.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES RAISED BY JUDGE BERNSTEIN INCLUDING RESEARCH REGARDING LIMITING CLAUSES ON TERMS OF OFFICERS, GENERAL PARTNERS AND MANAGERS (3.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/19/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO DEBTOR TIERS INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/20/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO CASH COLLATERAL ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF DRAFT OF INTERIM ORDER AUTHORIZING USE OF CASH COLLATERAL CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/20/2011 HEF 0.7 $400.00 $280.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES RAISED BY JUDGE BERNSTEIN INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS (.7); CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/26/2011 HEF 0.7 $400.00 $280.00 ATTENTION TO MEMO ADDRESSING ELECTION AND LIMITATIONS ON LIMITED PARTNERS ISSUES RAISED BY JUDGE BERNSTEIN (.7) CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/27/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO CASE STRATEGY INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH ROBERT LEINWAND AND JOHN D'ERCOLE. CASE ADMINISTRATION 4/28/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO CASE PREPARATION INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH A. MITCHELL GREENE MITCHELL GREENE AND JOHN D'ERCOLE CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/2/2011 HEF 0.8 $400.00 $320.00 ATTENTION TO CASE PREPARATION INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH ADAM GREENE (.8) CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/2/2011 HEF 1.5 $400.00 $600.00 ATTENTION TO CASE PREPARATION INCLUDING REVIEW OF FILE DOCUMENTS REGARDING RISK ADJUSTED DEBT NOTES (1.5) CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/16/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO CASE PREPARATION INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH FRED RINGEL AND ADAM GREENE. CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/17/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO CASE PREPARATION INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH A. MITCHELL GREENE, FRED RINGEL AND LORI SCHWARTZ CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/23/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO CENTURY CLAIM INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH BRENDA NATARAJAN (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/25/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATIENTION TO CENTURY LIEN CLAIM INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH BRENDA NATARAJAN (.5); CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/25/2011 HEF 1.0 $400.00 $400.00 ATIENTION TO AUDIT INQUIRY INCLUDING REVIEW OF NOTATED BILLING MEMORANDUM AND CORRESPONDING DAILY TIME SHEETS (1.0) CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 52 of 61
Schedule B 3 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 5/26/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO CLAIMED CENTURY LIEN INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH MARSHALL BERNSTEIN AND BRENDA NATARAJAN RE: POLISHING MEMO CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/26/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO BASILE CLAIM REGARDING SOUTHWOOD COURT PROPERTIES LLC INCLUDING TELEPHONE CALL WITH DON DEVITT (.4) CASE ADMINISTRATION 5/26/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED FUSION TRANSACTION INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH A. MITCHELL GREENE; EMAILS TO LEE PERSHAN AND MEGAN PETRUS (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/1/2011 HEF 0.1 $400.00 $40.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT COLLATERAL ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT LOAN AGREEMENT REGARDING WEST END SPECIAL OPPORTUNITY FUND AND WEST END CASH LIQUIDITY FUND (. 1); CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/2/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED FUSION TRANSACTION INCLUDING REVIEW OF CLIENT DOCUMENTS (.5); CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/3/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO INQUIRIES FROM FTI CONSULTING INCLUDING CONFERENCE CALL WITH RAY HESLIN AND MARK GREENBERG (.4) CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/3/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO CENTURY LIEN ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH BRENDA NATARAJAN (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/6/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES RE: CENTURY LIENS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH BRENDA NATARAJAN REGARDING DRAFT OF MEMO (.3); CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/6/2011 HEF 1.4 $400.00 $560.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES REGARDING MERRILL HOLDINGS IN NFA FUNDING LLC AND RELATED ITEMS CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/6/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT AND WEST LB ISSUES CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/7/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO CENTURY CLAIM TO COLLATERAL FROM WE/MERCURY INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS (.5); CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/7/2011 HEF 0.6 $400.00 $240.00 ATTENTION TO REQUESTS FROM FTI CONSULTING CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/7/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO FUSION MATTER INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/8/2011 HEF 1.6 $400.00 $640.00 ATTENTION TO REQUESTS OF FTI CONSULTING INCLUDING REVIEW OF FILES, PREPARATION OF DOCUMENTS AND RESPONSES CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/8/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO CENTURY CLAIMS REGARDING WEST END/MERCURY CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/21/2011 HEF 2.8 $400.00 $1,120.00 ATTENTION TO SERVICER ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF SERVICER AGREEMENTS (2.8) CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/21/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO CAPLEASE ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH ADAM GREENE CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/24/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT AND WESTLB ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH A MITCHELL GREENE AND JOHN D'ERCOLE CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/27/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 A TIENTION TO NORTH LIGHT MA TIERS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH BRENDA NATARAJAN CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/28/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO CAPLEASE ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH ADAM GREENE CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/28/2011 HEF 0.7 $400.00 $280.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT MATTERS INCLUDING REVISE DOCUMENTS AND EMAIL TO ADAM GREENE AND ROBERT LEINWAND RE: ML & ITS INTEREST IN NFA CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 53 of 61
Schedule B 4 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 6/29/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO KULISH MATTERS INCLUDING TELEPHONE CALL WITH ELLEN BURKE (1.1) CASE ADMINISTRATION 6/30/2011 HEF 0.6 $400.00 $240.00 ATTENTION TO KULISH MATTERS INCLUDING CONTINUED PREPARATION OF DOCUMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/5/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO FTI CONSULTING REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM FRED RINGEL, ESQ. CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/6/2011 HEF 0.8 $400.00 $320.00 ATTENTION TO FTI CONSULTING DOCUMENT REQUESTS INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS AND EMAILS TO AND FROM FRED RINGEL, ESQ. AND MEGAN PETRUS, ESQ. CASE ADMINISTRATION 7/7/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO FTI DOCUMENTS REQUESTS INCLUDING COMPILE CERTAIN REQUESTED DOCUMENTS AND EMAIL TO FRED RINGEL, ESQ. CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/1/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO PREPARATION OF BANKRUPTCY PLAN INCLUDING WORK WITH ADAM GREENE ON NORTHLIGHT AND THEIR LIENS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/1/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO INSURANCE COVERAGE CLAIM INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH JOHN D'ERCOLE AND ADAM GREENE RE: SENTIALS AFFILIATE V. SUBSIDIARIES (.4); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/1/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO CENTURY MATTER INCLUDING REVIEW OF EMAILS FROM BRENDA NATARAJAN CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/2/2011 HEF 1.3 $400.00 $520.00 ATTENTION TO PLAN INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH FRED RINGEL REGARDING CAP LEASE AND KULISH MATTERS(1 .3); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/3/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO PREPARATION OF BANKRUPTCY PLAN INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH FRED RINGEL AND MITCHELL GREENE (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/4/2011 HEF 1.3 $400.00 $520.00 WORK ON PLAN ISSUES INCLUDING ATTENTION TO SWAP BREAKAGE ISSUES INCLUDING SEVERAL CONFERENCES WITH FRED RINGEL AND MITCHELL GREENE (1.3); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/5/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO BANKRUPTCY PLAN INCLUDING REVIEW OF WEST END REAL ESTATE DOCUMENTS (1.1); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/8/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT AND CAP LEASE INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH MITCHELL GREENE, FRED RINGEL, ADAM GREENE AND LEE PERSHAN (.3); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/9/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF UNDERLYING DOCUMENTS (1 .1); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/10/2011 HEF 1.7 $400.00 $680.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH MITCHELL GREENE, ADAM GREENE AND ERIC KORSTEN OF FOCUS CAPITAL CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/19/2011 HEF 1.2 $400.00 $480.00 ATTENTION TO SWAPS AND NORTHLIGHT COLLATERAL ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS (1.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/22/2011 HEF 0.1 $400.00 $40.00 ATTENTION TO SWAPS ISSUE IN RESPECT TO NORTHLIGHT CLAIMS INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH BRENDA NATARAJAN AND ADAM GREENE (.1) CASE ADMINISTRATION 8/23/2011 HEF 2.2 $400.00 $880.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT CLAIMS RE: SWAP PAYMENTS INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS; REVIEW OF EMAILS INCLUDING 04/11/11 EMAIL TO BOB WOODS, 04/12/11 EMAIL TO MARC LOPRESTI, 05/08/11 EMAIL TO ROBERT LEINWAND (2.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 54 of 61
Schedule B 5 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 8/24/2011 HEF 4.9 $400.00 $1,960.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES REGARDING NORTH LIGHT MANAGEMENT FEES INCLUDING REVIEW OF DECEMBER 18, 2009 LOAN DOCUMENTS (.8); NORTH LIGHT DISTRESSED REAL ESTATE FUND LP AGREEMENT (.4); FOUR (4) NORTHLIGHT TRANSFER AND EXCHANGE AGREEMENTS (1.9); NORTHLIGHT FOOD FRANCHISE FUND LP AGREEMENT (1.0);NORTHLIGHT FOOD FRANCHISE FUND II, LP AGREEMENT (.5); AND NORTHLIGHT EQUIPMENT FUND I, LP AGREEMENT (.3); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/8/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO NORTH LIGHT CLAIMS INCLUDING REVIEW DECEMBER 2009 LOAN AGREEMENT (1.1); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/12/2011 HEF 0.6 $400.00 $240.00 ATTENTION TO BANKRUPTCY PLAN MATTERS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH FRED RINGEL REGARDING FORMS OF PROMISSORY NOTE AND SECURITY AGREEMENT FOR NORTHLIGHT, IBERIA BANK AND CAPLEASE SERVICES CORP. CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/13/2011 HEF 1.0 $400.00 $400.00 ATTENTION TO DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH MITCHELL GREENE (.7) AND FRED RINGEL (.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/16/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING 2 CONFERENCES W/ A. MITCHELL GREENE (.7) & (.4) CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/18/2011 HEF 4.1 $400.00 $1,640.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF AUGUST 2011 WATERFALL REPORTS (2.6); AND DECEMBER 18, 2009 NORTHLIGHT LOAN AGREEMENT (1 .5) CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/19/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO EXAMINER INQUIRIES INCLUDING REVIEW OF CORRESPONDENCE WITH KATIE KADLEC AT NATIONAL FRANCHISE ACCEPTANCE, LLC (1 .1); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/26/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO WESTLB QUESTIONS INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS (.5); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/27/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO WESTLB QUESTIONS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH FRED RINGEL (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/27/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO SOUTHWOOD COURT TRANSACTION INCLUDING EMAIL FROM DON DEVITT (.1); EMAIL TO MITCHELL GREENE (.2) CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/28/2011 HEF 2.0 $400.00 $800.00 ATTENTION TO W/E MORTGAGE OPPORTUNITY FUND LP ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF DECEMBER 15,2003 PROMISSORY NOTE FROM CHICAGO DIVERSIFIED FOODS CORP (.4).; REVIEW OF W/E MORTGAGE OPPORTUNITY FUND FILE DOCUMENTS (1.2); EMAILS TO AND FROM DON DEVITT (.2); AND MITCHELL GREENE (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 55 of 61
Schedule B 6 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 9/29/2011 HEF 3.1 $400.00 $1,240.00 ATTENTION TO CHICAGO DIVERSIFIED FOODS PROMISSORY NOTE INCLUDING REVIEW OF W/E MORTGAGE OPPORTUNITY FUND LP DOCUMENTS (1.7); DETERMINE APPLICABLE CURRENT FLOATING INTEREST RATE (1 .0); CONFERENCE WITH LEE PERSHAN RE NOTE & WHETHER WEFA COULD ACCELERATE SAME (.2); EMAILS TO AND FROM DON DEVITT, MITCHELL GREENE AND LEE PERSHAN RE: ACCELERATION OF THE LOAN (.2). CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/30/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO SOUTHWOOD COURT SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM MITCHELL GREENE (.3); CASE ADMINISTRATION 9/30/2011 HEF 3.1 $400.00 $1,240.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT WESTLB ISSUES INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM MARC LOPRESTI (.3); REVIEW OF DECEMBER 18, 2009 SECOND AMENDMENT TO WESTLB CREDIT AGREEMENT (1 .0) AND 09/21/07 WESTLB CREDIT AGREEMENT (1 .8). CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/3/2011 HEF 0.6 $400.00 $240.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED AMAGANSETT SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT INCLUDING REVIEW OF UNDERL YING DOCUMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/3/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PREPARATION INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH MITCHELL GREENE (.2); AND FRED RINGEL REGARDING AMENDED WESTLB CREDIT AGREEMENT (.3). CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/4/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO AMAGANSETT MATTER INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/5/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES RELATING TO DZ BANK HEDGE AGREEMENTS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/6/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO FORM PROMISSORY NOTES AND MORTGAGES TO NORTHLIGHT, CAPLEASE AND CENTURY INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM FRED RINGEL (2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/10/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO AMAGANSETT MATTER INCLUDING LETTER FROM ROBERT KOUFFMAN (.2); CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/10/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES PERTAINING TO NORTHLIGHT MANAGEMENT FEES INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH ADAM GREENE. CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/12/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED SOUTHWOOD COURT TRANSACTION INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM DON DEVITT (.2) AND CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE. (.2) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/12/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF NORTHLIGHT LOAN INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH ADAM GREENE. CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/12/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO SWAP AGREEMENT ISSUES INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM DON DEVITT (.2) AND CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE (.1) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/13/2011 HEF 0.7 $400.00 $280.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES REGARDING SWAP AGREEMENTS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE AND ADAM GREENE (.4); CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 56 of 61
Schedule B 7 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 10/13/2011 HEF 1.5 $400.00 $600.00 ATTENTION TO NORTHLIGHT CLAIM FOR DEFAULT INTEREST INCLUDING REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT LOAN DOCUMENTS (1.2) AND CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE AND ADAM GREENE (.3). CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/14/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES REGARDING SWAP AGREEMENTS INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM JAYAN KRISHNAN (.3) CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/18/2011 HEF 0.8 $400.00 $320.00 ATTENTION TO HEDGE AGREEMENT BREAKAGE ISSUES INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM JAYAN KRISHNAN (DZ BANK) (.5); AND BRENDA NATARAJAN (.3); CASE ADMINISTRATION 10/19/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO HEDGE AGREEMENT BREAKAGE ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH BRENDA NATARAJAN AND MITCHELL GREENE (.2); EMAILS TO AND FROM BRENDA NATARAJAN AND EMILY DEVILLA (.2). CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/1/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO SOUTHWOOD COURT MATTERS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE AND LORI SCHWARTZ (.3); CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/2/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO SOUTHWOOD COURT MATTER INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH MITCHELL GREENE (.2); AND LORI SCHWARTZ (.1); CASE ADMINISTRATION 11/3/2011 HEF 0.7 $400.00 $280.00 ATTENTION TO SOUTHWOOD COURT TRANSACTION INCLUDING EMAILS AND LETTERS TO AND FROM BOB KAUFMAN, JOE KENEALLY AND PECONIC ABSTRACT (.7); CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/5/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED LOAN MODIFICATION INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH ADAM GREENE. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/5/2011 HEF 1.8 $400.00 $720.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED LOAN MODIFICATION INCLUDING REVIEW OF NORTHLIGHT DISCUSSION OUTLINE OF CERTAIN KEY LOAN RESTRUCTURING TERMS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/13/2011 HEF 1.4 $400.00 $560.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED KULISH TRANSFERS INCLUDING REVIEW AND REVISE DRAFT OF MEMBERSHIP INTEREST PURCHASE AGREEMENT. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/13/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED KULISH TRANSFERS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH ADAM GREENE. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/13/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED KULISH TRANSFERS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/13/2011 HEF 0.1 $400.00 $40.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED KULISH TRANSFERS INCLUDING EMAIL TO MITCHELL GREENE CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/13/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED KULISH TRANSFERS INCLUDING REVIEW PROPOSED CONSENTS TO NORTH LIGHT MEMBER. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/13/2011 HEF 1.2 $400.00 $480.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED KULISH TRANSFERS INCLUDING REVIEW NORTHLIGHT FILE INCLUDING JANUARY, 2010 SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT REGARDING FEES. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/13/2011 HEF 0.7 $400.00 $280.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED KULISH TRANSFERS INCLUDING REVIEW PROPOSED CONSENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/13/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED KULISH TRANSFERS INCLUDING REVIEW 12/13/11 NORTH LIGHT MEMO REGARDING MCC FUNDING PERFORMANCE. CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 57 of 61
Schedule B 8 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 12/13/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED KULISH TRANSFERS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE REGARDING ABOVE NORTHLIGHT MEMO. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.8 $400.00 $320.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF DZ BANK CREDIT FACILITY INCLUDING REVIEW OF DRAFT OF FIRST AMENDMENT TO THIRD (3RD) AMENDED AND RESTATED FRANCHISE LOAN ORIGINATION AGREEMENT. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 1.0 $400.00 $400.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF DZ BANK CREDIT FACILITY INCLUDING REVIEW OF NORTH LIGHT FILE FOR JUNE 11,2010 FRANCHISE LOAN AGREEMENTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 1.4 $400.00 $560.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF DZ BANK CREDIT FACILITY INCLUDING REVIEW OF JANUARY 26,2010 SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED FRANCHISE LOAN ORIGINATION AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF DZ BANK CREDIT FACILITY INCLUDING EMAIL TO MITCHELL GREENE REGARDING DRAFT OF AMENDMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO WEST END REAL ESTATE FUND TRANSFERS INCLUDING REVIEW OF SCIOTO LLC AGREEMENT REGARDING TRANSFERS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO WEST END REAL ESTATE FUND TRANSFERS INCLUDING REVIEW OF BURGUNDY LLC AGREEMENT REGARDING TRANSFERS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO WEST END REAL ESTATE FUND TRANSFERS INCLUDING REVIEW OF 90 LLC AGREEMENT REGARDING TRANSFERS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO WEST END REAL ESTATE FUND TRANSFERS INCLUDING REVIEW OF EASTON RIDGE LLC AGREEMENT REGARDING TRANSFERS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO WEST END REAL ESTATE FUND TRANSFERS INCLUDING REVIEW OF IVYWOOD LLC AGREEMENT REGARDING TRANSFERS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO WEST END REAL ESTATE FUND TRANSFERS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE REGARDING ABOVE TRANSFER RESTRICTIONS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO WEST END REAL ESTATE FUND TRANSFERS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH FRED RINGEL REGARDING ABOVE TRANSFER RESTRICTIONS CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO WEST END REAL ESTATE FUND TRANSFERS INCLUDING EMAIL FROM ADAM GREENE AND REVIEW NEW DRAFT. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO WEST END REAL ESTATE FUND TRANSFERS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH ADAM GREENE. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 0.1 $400.00 $40.00 ATTENTION TO WEST END REAL ESTATE FUND TRANSFERS INCLUDING EMAIL FROM RAY HESLIN. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/14/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF DZ BANK CREDIT FACILITY INCLUDING REVIEW OF JANUARY 26, 2010 SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED FRANCHISE LOAN FUNDING AGREEMENT. CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 58 of 61
Schedule B 9 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 12/16/2011 HEF 0.1 $400.00 $40.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING EMAIL FROM MITCHELL GREENE REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING EMAIL TO MARK HIRSCHHORN REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING TELEPHONE CALL WITH RAY HESLIN REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING TELEPHONE CALL WITH MITCHELL GREENE REGARDING SHUT-OFF OF WATERFALL. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING TELEPHONE CALL WITH RAY HESLIN REGARDING SHUT-OFF OF WATERFALL. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM MARK HIRSCHHORN REGARDING SHUT-OFF OF WATERFALL. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM MARK HIRSCHHORN AND ADAM GREENE REGARDING CONFERENCE CALL. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING WORK ON EMERGENCY ISSUES REGARDING DEFAULT FRANCHISE LOANS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCE CALL WITH NORTHLIGHT AND MATT STEN REGARDING DEFAULTED FRANCHISE LOANS CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING TELEPHONE CALL WITH RAY HESLIN AND ADAM GREENE REGARDING FRANCHISE LOANS NOW IN DEFAULT. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/16/2011 HEF 0.2 $400.00 $80.00 ATTENTION TO WATERFALL ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH MITCHELL GREENE REGARDING EMERGENCY ISSUES FROM DEFAULTS CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/22/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO NEW NORTH LIGHT LOAN INCLUDING EMAILS TO AND FROM MITCHELL GREENE, ADAM GREENE AND FRED RINGEL REGARDING SAME. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/22/2011 HEF 2.3 $400.00 $920.00 ATTENTION TO NEW NORTH LIGHT LOAN; BEGIN REVIEW OF DRAFT OF LOAN AGREEMENT. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/22/2011 HEF 2.2 $400.00 $880.00 ATTENTION TO NEW NORTH LIGHT LOAN; BEGIN REVIEW OF SECOND AMENDED PLAN CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/23/2011 HEF 1.3 $400.00 $520.00 ATTENTION TO NEW NORTH LIGHT TRANSACTION INCLUDING CONTINUED REVIEW OF DRAFT OF LOAN AGREEMENT. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/23/2011 HEF 2.0 $400.00 $800.00 ATTENTION TO NEW NORTHLIGHT TRANSACTION INCLUDING CONTINUED REVIEW OF SECOND AMENDED PLAN OF LIQUIDATION. CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/28/2011 HEF 3.9 $400.00 $1,560.00 ATTENTION TO NEW NORTHLIGHT LOAN INCLUDING PREPARE COMMENTS TO LOAN AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/28/2011 HEF 1.2 $400.00 $480.00 ATTENTION TO NEW NORTHLIGHT LOAN INCLUDING PREPARE COMMENTS TO PLEDGE AGREEMENT CASE ADMINISTRATION 12/28/2011 HEF 0.3 $400.00 $120.00 ATTENTION TO NEW NORTH LIGHT LOAN INCLUDING PREPARE COMMENTS TO NEW NOTE CASE ADMINISTRATION 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 59 of 61
Schedule B 10 DATE ATTY TIME (hrs) RATE VALUE DIARY CHART 12/28/2011 HEF 0.4 $400.00 $160.00 ATTENTION TO NEW NORTH LIGHT LOAN INCLUDING EMAILS TO MITCHELL GREENE, FRED RINGEL AND ADAM GREENE REGARDING DRAFTS OF NEW LOAN DOCUMENTS. CASE ADMINISTRATION 1/5/2012 HEF 1.0 $400.00 $400.00 ATTENTION TO FROZEN DZ WATERFALL INCLUDING REVIEW OF NEW DRAFT OF PROPOSED THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED LENDER FEE LETTER AGREEMENT. CASE ADMINISTRATION 3/16/2011 HEF 1.1 $400.00 $440.00 ATTENTION TO PROSPECTIVE CASH COLLATERAL AGREEMENT WITH NORTH LIGHT INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS (1.1) FINANCING 3/17/2011 HEF 1.5 $400.00 $600.00 ATTENTION TO NON-COLLATERALIZED ASSETS OF WEST END ENTITIES INCLUDING REVIEW OF DZ BANK CREDIT FACILITY DOCUMENTS, NORTHLIGHT LOAN DOCUMENTS AND VRP TRANSFER DOCUMENTS (1 .5) ASSET ANALYSIS AND RECOVERY 3/21/2011 HEF 2.2 $400.00 $880.00 ATTENTION TO ISSUES IN RESPECT OF SWAPS AND RADS INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS (2.2) ASSET ANALYSIS AND RECOVERY 3/7/2011 HEF 0.5 $400.00 $200.00 ATTENTION TO HOLDINGS IN KULISH ENTITIES INCLUDING REVIEW OF FILE DOCUMENTS (.5) CASE PREPARATION 3/21/2011 HEF 1.8 $400.00 $720.00 ATTENTION TO RADS ISSUES INCLUDING REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS AND CONFERENCES WITH MITCH GREENE AND LEE PERSHAN ON SAME. CASE PREPARATION 3/24/2011 HEF 1.5 $400.00 $600.00 ATTENTION TO CLAIMS OF DURESS INCLUDING CONFERENCE WITH MITCH GREENE AND BOB LEINWAND, REVIEW OF CRANDALL DOCUMENTS (1 .5); CASE PREPARATION 3/25/2011 HEF 2.0 $400.00 $800.00 ATTENTION TO RESPONSE TO U.S. TRUSTEE'S MOTION INCLUDING PREPARATION OF DOCUMENTS CASE PREPARATION 3/28/2011 HEF 0.6 $400.00 $240.00 ATTENTION TO LITIGATION ISSUES INCLUDING CONFERENCES WITH MITCH GREENE, ADAM GREENE, RAY HESLIN AND LAURA NASTRO (.6); CASE PREPARATION 134.9 $400.00 $53,960.00 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 60 of 61
Schedule C 1 Date Timekeeper Description Hours 3/15/2011 O'Neill Reviewed investor emails and voicemails 1.5 3/16/2011 Radke Drafted and sent out email to West End investors re: bankruptcy 2.0 3/18/2011 O'Neill Check investor emails and summarize same 1.0 3/18/2011 O'Neill Assist with email to investors 1.0 3/18/2011 Unger Review correspondence regarding developments 1.0 3/21/2011 Radke Respond to investor emails and phone calls 1.0 3/24/2011 O'Neill Emails and telephone calls regarding bankruptcy 2.0 3/24/2011 O'Neill Drafted additional emails to investors 2.2 3/24/2011 Radke Review and respond to investor emails 1.0 3/28/2011 Unger Conference with Radke regarding developments 1.0 3/28/2011 Unger Review of materials filed in bankruptcy court proceeding 3.0 4/4/2011 Unger Review of information provided by West End 1.5 4/4/2011 Radke Review and respond to investor email 1.0 4/5/2011 Radke Conference with Unger on developments 2.0 4/18/2011 Unger Review of materials for inclusion in preliminary report of Independent Monitor 1.5 4/19/2011 Unger Review of materials for inclusion in preliminary report of Independent Monitor 1.5 4/21/2011 Unger Review of additional materials received from Company 1.0 5/9/2011 Unger Review recent bankruptcy filings 1.0 5/9/2011 Unger Preparation for trip to attend court proceedings 1.0 5/24/2011 Unger Preparation for bankruptcy hearing 1.5 6/1/2011 Unger Review of recent bankruptcy filings 0.5 6/6/2011 Unger Review of materials filed in bankruptcy proceeding 1.0 6/13/2011 Unger Review of recent bankruptcy court filings and compared to information provided directly by company 1.0 7/20/2011 Unger Conference with government attorneys regarding developments 1.0 7/21/2011 Unger Research on Independent Monitor status issues 1.0 7/21/2011 Radke Work on memorandum in response to motion to show cause 2.5 7/22/2011 Unger Work on draft reply brief 1.0 7/26/2011 Radke Preparation for 7/27 District Court hearing, reviewed briefs 2.5 7/26/2011 Radke Reviewed West End Reply brief 1.0 7/26/2011 Unger Reviewed West End reply brief and related filings 2.5 7/27/2011 Radke Preparation for court hearing 2.5 7/27/2011 Radke Conference with Unger and government attorneys 1.0 7/27/2011 Unger Preparation for court hearing 1.5 7/27/2011 Unger Conference with Radke and government attorneys 1.0 9/7/2011 Unger Preparation for 9/8 bankruptcy court hearing 1.0 9/8/2011 Unger Preparation for bankruptcy court hearing 1.0 9/8/2011 Unger Preparation at bankruptcy court hearing 1.5 9/8/2011 Radke Preparation for bankruptcy court hearing 3.0 9/8/2011 Radke Preparation in bankruptcy court hearing 1.5 Attorney Rate Brown $595 Radke $525 Unger $487 Angelich $450 O'Neill $235 Utlik $325 11-11152-smb Doc 396 Filed 07/03/12 Entered 07/03/12 07:48:54 Main Document Pg 61 of 61
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.