whatever concerns the trustee had about the complicated nature of the particular parties involved in water to make sure the for sale went forward in an orderly fashion is it your position that those would be of two thousand and one so all so it was in the fall i take it for nonpayment and then some time after it was in the fall for nonpayment  there was the petition in bankruptcy it was not the petition in bankruptcy that petition the default or my right on the petition in fantasy came off a week before that i just know that  the partition proceedings these parties were adverse to each other in a lot of fun a lot of issues in that case where they not and and then there was money spent or time spent by bankruptcy counsel to seek a stay of the foreclosure and and that was what unsuccessful and then what happened to the property was then sold during the during the pendency of that foreclosure proceedings right now whatever happened to the partition proceed action the petition action was automatically affirm one for three thousand four hundred thirty dollars which is for defending the property in the state proceedings you can you explain what that charges for this is this is for defending the property in the state for teams which are filed by your client only about the trustee attempting to gain maximum value for the for the value of the property doesn't that work to the benefit of your client as well get i understand she doesn't want to sell this property she's very unhappy about that sure rather put it in a different way but given that she's going to on these things that don't really concern her well maybe not really concerned her but they did go to the question of how much money they could you could get for the property that does work to her benefit the how much money did th and expenses not including compensation of the trustee yes your honor was that what is it that you contend would be even under if we read that bankruptcy code literally what is it that failure apparently that you're making point of failure in the stein to specifically object to that but if in fact the trustees simply hiring council to do what the trustee is obligated to do for the benefit five or six or under three sixty three threats right we are not under five or six feet and that's that's that's an important distinction in physics you're dealing with with costs that would be directly related to to to the you know a week before that before the  is or isn't compensation of the trustee it doesn't have anything to do whether it's a benefit to the co owner that has to be analyzed does it not as to whether or not it falls within the compensation of the trustee well i think the congress mance the trustee and his council which the congress would have said so now invests what happened here in the bankruptcy court and the resolution by which this property w along defending the action that your client brought to petition in the state court she was ready for trial within a week right i believe that's the issues that were ready for litigation before the before the foreclosure was ever filed right and then whatever whatever the trustee hired lawyers to do by way of fending off the foreclosure proceedings would have been done by a prudent trustee to defend the both correct with zero conflict of interest and in this instance in this instance the attorney hired by the  the direction of that trustee and nobody else has corrected on him and and that attorney on behalf of the trustee is negotiating with this coat owner on behalf of the trust and nobody else i mean on behalf of the estate and nobody it allowed it as necessary on behalf of the stake yes or now then all that was ever accomplished here is i get the picture and you correct me if i'm wrong is that th attorney on behalf of the trust created a fund half of which goes to the state and the other half of which he sought to and succeeded in tying up to pay some future any money for us to be talking about lot of that is true except that the attorney for the trustee so far has succeeded in seeing to it that none of that money is paid to the co the only way that the trustee is going to move would in part on an action against the cohen who share of the proceeds other than the issues before this court would be if the trustee found there was a bond find a reason to do so and if there was pardons in this state two to two to two to work with at this point in this proceeding we have been through is that we are we are we are here today we still have to have to figure out how much money is supposed to go to knowing the rules were clear here litigating over an issue that bankruptcy should have been charged or not whether it had to be of benefit or non benefit so well that the point being that these are not the issues that are before the court on appeal from the times of the the how much of the you know the transferring withholding they said that there were these other issues not related to the legal issues that the value was called upon and were called upon to decide so i'm still unclear what are the issues there counselor so there are no other pending actions so when are cannot say that the court's findings of direct benefits were clearly erroneous we so conclude even though some of the services e g discussions with the broker regarding valuation and marketing of the downy property appear to be services reflecting trustee duties that ordinarily ought to be performed by any qualified trustee without assistance of counsel and thus would ordinarily be disqualified from payment under three sixty three now are you in disagreement with that conclusion or that observation of our well yes your honor i am going to say you have a dispute as your is your position that attorney fees by definition are not compensation of the trustee is that your position so as long as it shows  then it's not part of his statutory then that's that's correct on every word of the facts come within three sixty three j as compensation of the trustee you know there is the fact the fact that the are the trustees from represents the trust do understand i think i understand as usual i'm just trying to understand how you're allocating here and any competent trustee should have been able to do this particular act which in fact got charged as legal fees so if you take a vat at its word it probably would have said this is not permissible you can't get around three thirty three j white labeling something as attorney fees when in reality it is something that is part of the duties of the trustee for which the trustee is getting statutory compensation correct well your honor i understand that this should and so this is not the conversation are at work and that you know that i do understand that issue and has the bankruptcy court is not the issue i'm just trying to get your position i'm not trying to decide whether in this particular instance of the bath is right or wrong i'm trying to understand if the trustees position is that even if the trustee engages in something which a bankruptcy judge or judges in the case of that might otherwise conclude would be part of the duties of the trustee if it shows up as attorney fees that's the end of the inquiry that's not your position is that well your honor i would say that events that took place with respect to this the sale of this property some of it was part of mr diamond statutory compensation as trustee some of it shows up as attorney fees whether it was done in jail or was an outside for that mr diamond retained i'm not in curing his abilities or is ethics or i think i'm just trying to understand is the label the category in which these c the answer would be you can't explain well i would say that that's that three sixty three jay does not counsel with all respect is how much of these fees assuming some attorney fees may be assuming for argument some attorney fees may be within costs and expenses how many of how much of that can be transferred pro rata to the code on that it may be a dispute between the trustee and counsel whether the bankruptcy court is going to allow the amount of fees that were incurred for the expected when the bankruptcy court may say we don't think i don't think as a bankruptcy court that the fees were either reasonable or necessary or they should have been performed by the trustee corre the that's that's the fact that the the in this are you trying to say that if the if the if the bankruptcy court you know assessing the cost what will they ever be used for or ari ari not the coach or all right so the fact that she has a claim against the estate has nothing to do with what ever the trustee might for see using that fund for make if it's going to be used to pay her share the song or is it going to be used to pay the trustees claim if he succeeds against her either way yes well in center or not i can't i can't visualize twice  know it's being held pending a determination as to how much the coroner should should get and how you know how are we ever going to know how much she should be and we would we would go into bankruptcy court to