Court Opinion

ID: 9411231
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-26 00:00:53.659441+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:21:05.588736
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-51125        Document: 00516832965             Page: 1      Date Filed: 07/25/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-51125
                                    Summary Calendar                                   FILED
                                    ____________                                     July 25, 2023
                                                   Lyle W. Cayce
                                                        Clerk
   In the Matter of Francis McQueen Rozelle, Jr.; Clarita
   Sommers Johnson,

                                                                                     Debtors,

   Francis McQueen Rozelle, Jr.,

                                                                                Appellant,

                                            versus

   John Patrick Lowe; Jennifer Rothe,

                                                                                 Appellees.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 5:21-CV-1264
                     ______________________________

   Before Davis, Smith, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-51125     Document: 00516832965           Page: 2   Date Filed: 07/25/2023

                                    No. 22-51125

          Francis McQueen Rozelle, Jr., proceeding pro se, appeals the district
   court’s judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s order approving the
   estate’s accountant final fee application. Because the bankruptcy court did
   not abuse its discretion, we AFFIRM.
          This Court applies the same standard of review as the district court in
   reviewing the bankruptcy court’s decision approving professional fees under
   11 U.S.C. § 330. In re Woerner, 783 F.3d 266, 270 (5th Cir. 2015)(en banc).
   That is, we review the bankruptcy court’s approval of professional fees for
   an abuse of discretion.    Id.   An abuse of discretion occurs when the
   bankruptcy court (1) applies an improper legal standard or follows an
   improper procedure, or (2) bases its decision on findings of fact that are
   clearly erroneous. Id.
          Rozelle does not challenge the legal standard applied by the
   bankruptcy court. He contends that the bankruptcy court erred because it
   approved fees for the accountant’s time spent “reading and analyzing legal
   pleadings and orders,” which he contends was not necessary. As the Trustee
   argues, however, the bankruptcy court acted within its discretion to credit
   the accountant’s testimony on direct examination that she needed to stay
   informed of case developments to determine whether any tax consequences
   were implicated. Rozelle also argues that the bankruptcy court erred in
   approving tasks that the accountant could have allowed a bookkeeper in her
   office to complete, reducing the fee owed to her. Although the accountant
   testified that a bookkeeper in her office could have performed some of the
   tasks, she also testified that the savings would not have been “substantial.”
   Again, the bankruptcy court acted within its discretion in crediting the
   accountant’s testimony that her services were necessary and compensation
   reasonable.

                                         2
Case: 22-51125        Document: 00516832965             Page: 3      Date Filed: 07/25/2023

                                         No. 22-51125

           Although Rozelle presents numerous arguments in his brief reflecting
   his dissatisfaction with the bankruptcy proceedings, 1 he fails to show that the
   bankruptcy court abused its discretion in approving the final fee application
   of the estate’s accountant. Accordingly, we AFFIRM.

           _____________________
           1
              The factual background of the bankruptcy proceedings are described in detail in
   Rozelle v. Lowe, No. 5:15-CV-108 RP, 2016 WL 8729475 (W.D. Tex. Mar. 29, 2016), aff’d
   In Matter of Rozelle, 671 F. App’x 359 (5th Cir. 2016) (unpublished).

                                               3