Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled July 1, 2025

Compeer Financial, ACA v. Corporate America Lending, Inc.

Judge
Elizabeth Cowan Wright
Docket
0:24-cv-01896
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
8

Counsel19 of record
PLAINTIFF
Chris Lovrien Jones Day
David J. Feder Jones Day
Joseph James Boylan Jones Day
W. Anders Folk Jones Day - Minneapolis
Trevor Parkes National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
RECEIVER
Ethan Trotz Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
John E. Mitchell Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
Yelena Archiyan Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
DEFENDANT
Bassford Remele2 attorneys
Aram V. Desteian, Kevin P. Hickey
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips2 attorneys
Barry W. Lee, Misa Eiritz
Fredrikson & Byron, P.A.PA2 attorneys
Joseph T. Dixon , III, Natasha T. Robinson
Georgeson Law Offices
Clarence Russell Georgeson
Cross Castle
Nicholas J. Nelson
Hernandez Laska LLPLLP
Norayr (Noro) Mejlumyan
CrossCastle PLLCPLLC
Samuel W. Diehl
Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLPLLP
David A. Schwarz

Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate and have been consolidated across spelling variants.

Fee PetitionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Compeer Financial v. Corporate America Lending, Judge Wright granted the receiver’s fee motion and approved final payments to Katten and Paladin.

Who this affects

The order directly affects Receiver T. Scott Avila, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Paladin Management Group, and the receivership property from which approved fees and expenses are paid. It also establishes procedures for future objections by the parties and other notice recipients.

What happened

In Compeer Financial, ACA v. Corporate America Lending, Inc., the court had appointed T. Scott Avila as receiver over Corporate America Lending’s assets. The receiver was authorized to hire professionals and pay reasonable fees and expenses from the receivership property.

The receiver asked the court to approve fees and expenses for Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP and Paladin Management Group for work performed through April 30, 2025. No party objected. The request totaled $253,585.41 for Katten and $318,574.80 for Paladin.

Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright granted the motion and approved the requested amounts on a final basis. The receiver was authorized to pay each firm from its existing $375,000 retainer, and the court established procedures for reviewing future monthly fee requests.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Compeer Financial, ACA v. Corporate America Lending, Inc. · No. 0:24-cv-01896
Judge
Elizabeth Cowan Wright
Date
July 1, 2025

Background

On March 27, 2025, U.S. District Judge Jerry W. Blackwell appointed T. Scott Avila as receiver over the assets of Corporate America Lending, Inc. The receiver’s assignment was to identify and recover assets to satisfy awards issued by an arbitration merits panel. The receivership order set the receiver’s compensation at $850 per hour and allowed reimbursement for reasonable business and travel expenses associated with the receivership.

The order also authorized the receiver to employ professionals to assist with his duties. The court later authorized the receiver’s retention of Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP as counsel and Paladin Management Group as financial advisor. Both firms received initial retainers of $375,000. The firms intended to offset approved fees and expenses against those retainers.

First Fee Motion

The receiver sought approval of $253,585.41 for Katten, consisting of $250,197.00 in fees and $3,388.41 in expenses. He also sought approval of $318,574.80 for Paladin, consisting of $301,357.50 in fees and $17,217.30 in expenses. The motion included monthly statements describing the work performed. The receiver certified that the work was performed and necessary and that unnecessary or duplicative services had been removed. No party objected.

The court held a status conference after identifying concerns about whether the receiver had followed the proposed fee-approval procedures. The receiver later clarified that the hourly rates charged by Katten matched its engagement letter and that an earlier rate table had incorrectly listed 2024 rather than 2025 billing rates.

Court’s Analysis and Ruling

The court applied a reasonableness standard as a safeguard for reviewing the requested payments. After reviewing the monthly statements, the court found the fees and expenses reasonable. It stated that the hourly rates were generally within the range contemplated by the orders authorizing Katten’s and Paladin’s employment and that the time spent was reasonable given the case’s complexity.

Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright granted the receiver’s First Motion for Payment of Fees and Expenses. The court allowed Paladin $301,357.50 in compensation and $17,217.30 in expenses on a final basis, and allowed Katten $250,197.00 in compensation and $3,388.41 in expenses on a final basis. The receiver was authorized to pay Paladin $318,574.80 and Katten $253,585.41, with each payment offset by that firm’s $375,000 retainer.

The court also established procedures for future monthly fee motions. The receiver must file detailed monthly statements, provide notice to the specified parties, allow a 14-day objection period, and address any timely objections through a meet-and-confer process before the court conducts its review. The court cautioned Katten and Paladin to carefully consider staffing levels for future court proceedings and investigations.

The authoritative version

Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.