Source: http://masslitapp.com/html/Federal_Rules_of_Bankruptcy_Procedure/062017/Federal_Rules_of_Bankruptcy_Procedure_062017Rule_5002.html
Timestamp: 2019-08-24 02:52:02
Document Index: 529582858

Matched Legal Cases: ['§1910', '§458', '§101', '§101', '§101', '§327', '§45']

Rule 5002
The rule supplements two statutory provisions. Under 18 U.S.C. §1910, it is a criminal offense for a judge to appoint a relative as a trustee and, under 28 U.S.C. §458, a person may not be “appointed to or employed in any office or duty in any court” if he is a relative of any judge of that court. The rule prohibits the appointment or employment of a relative of a bankruptcy judge in a case pending before that bankruptcy judge or before other bankruptcy judges sitting within the district.
A relative is defined in §101(34) of the Code to be an “individual related by affinity or consanguinity within the third degree as determined by the common law, or individual in a step or adoptive relationship within such third degree.” Persons within the third degree under the common law system are as follows: first degree—parents, brothers and sisters, and children; second degree—grandparents, uncles and aunts, first cousins, nephews and nieces, and grandchildren; third degree—great grandparents, great uncles and aunts, first cousins once removed, second cousins, grand nephews and nieces, great grandchildren. Rule 9001 incorporates the definitions of §101 of the Code.
In order for the policy of this rule to be meaningfully implemented, it is necessary to extend the prohibition against appointment or employment to the firm or other business association of the ineligible person and to those affiliated with the firm or business association. “Firm” is defined in Rule 9001 to include a professional partnership or corporation of attorneys or accountants. All other types of business and professional associations and relationships are covered by this rule.
The amended rule is divided into two subdivisions. Subdivision (a) applies to relatives of bankruptcy judges and subdivision (b) applies to persons who are or have been connected with bankruptcy judges. Subdivision (a) permits no judicial discretion; subdivision (b) allows judicial discretion. In both subdivisions of the amended rule “bankruptcy judge” has been substituted for “judge”. The amended rule makes clear that it only applies to relatives of, or persons connected with, the bankruptcy judge. See In re Hilltop Sand and Gravel, Inc., 35 B.R. 412 (N.D. Ohio 1983).
Relatives are not eligible for appointment or employment when the bankruptcy judge to whom they are related makes the appointment or approves the employment. Canon 3(b)(4) of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which provides that the judge “shall exercise his power of appointment only on the basis of merit, avoiding nepotism and favoritism,” should guide a bankruptcy judge when a relative of a judge of the same bankruptcy court is considered for appointment or employment.
The policy underlying subdivision (b) is essentially the same as the policy embodied in the Code of Judicial Conduct. Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct instructs a judge to avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety, and Canon 3(b)(4) provides that the judge “should exercise his power of appointment only on the basis of merit, avoiding nepotism and favoritism.” Subdivision (b) alerts the potential appointee or employee and party seeking approval of employment to consider the possible relevance or impact of subdivision (b) and indicates to them that appropriate disclosure must be made to the bankruptcy court before accepting appointment or employment. The information required may be made a part of the application for approval of employment. See Rule 2014(a).
Subdivision (b) applies to persons connected with a bankruptcy judge. “Person” is defined in §101 of the Bankruptcy Code to include an “individual, partnership and corporation”. A partnership or corporation may be appointed or employed to serve in a bankruptcy case. If a bankruptcy judge is connected in some way with a partnership or corporation, it is necessary for the court to determine whether the appointment or employment of that partnership or corporation is proper.
The United States trustee neither appoints nor approves the employment of professional persons employed pursuant to §§327, 1103, or 1114 of the Code. Therefore, subdivision (a) is not a prohibition against judicial approval of employment of a professional person who is a relative of the United States trustee. However, the United States trustee monitors applications for compensation and reimbursement of expenses and may raise, appear and be heard on issues in the case. Employment of relatives of the United States trustee may be approved unless the court finds, after considering the relationship and the particular circumstances of the case, that the relationship would cause the employment to be improper. As used in this rule, “improper” includes the appearance of impropriety.
This rule is not exclusive of other laws or rules regulating ethical conduct. See, e.g., 28 CFR §45.735 –5.