
Joel R. Glucksman
Partner
201-896-7095 jglucksman@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Joel R. Glucksman
Date: May 27, 2014

Partner
201-896-7095 jglucksman@sh-law.comThe total fees and expenses to be paid to law firms and consultants engaged in the Detroit bankruptcy reached almost $36 million by the end of last year, according to the Detroit Free Press. Court-appointed fee examiner Robert Fishman revealed the figure in his latest quarterly report.
The top biller was the city’s lead bankruptcy firm, Jones Day, which submitted bills for over $16.6 million in fees and almost $734,000 in expenses, the news source explained. Next was Conway MacKenzie, Detroit’s restructuring consultant, which billed the city for $5.3 million in fees, followed by the Dentons law firm, which billed for $4.4 million in fees. In total, the city is paying fees and expenses for 16 law firms.
“Although the fees incurred by the professionals during the reporting period and covered by this Second Quarterly Report are substantial by any measure, the fee examiner believes that all of the requested fees are commensurate with the complexity and speed of the case, and the quality of the services that the professionals have provided,” Fishman wrote, according to Michigan Live. “Due to the magnitude and complexity of the Case, the novelty of the legal issues, the extremely tight time frames imposed by the court and the strong differences in opinion between the various parties about what to do and how to do it, it was (and continues to be) inevitable that the costs associated with the services provided by the various professionals were going to be significant.”
Fisherman is billing the city for $246,942.80, and almost $1,000 in expenses for his work during the last three months of 2013, the news source reported.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!