Opinion ID: 199309
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The factual relationship between the fee application and the malpractice claim.

Text: 32 The Iannochinos do not mount a serious challenge to the factual similarities between the two claims. Nor could they. As the Intelogic Trace court noted, the bankruptcy court must undertake a comprehensive evaluation of the services listed in a fee application when determining whether to award fees. Under section 330, the bankruptcy court must consider the nature, the extent, and the value of such services. 11 U.S.C. §a330(a)(3)(A). 11 A bankruptcy court therefore makes an implied finding of quality and value in the professional services provided to the Iannochinos during the bankruptcy. Intelogic Trace, 200 F.3d at 387. Likewise, the Iannochinos' malpractice claim entails the same concern, as their allegations of malpractice arise from the defendants' legal advice relating to the bankruptcy. It was this legal advice that formed the basis of Aframe's fee application. Thus, the central factual question in both claims is the same: What advice did the defendants give to the Iannochinos during the bankruptcy, and what was the quality and value of that advice? 33