of attorney fees as administrative expense (but fees not granted under facts of case)). As such, the Ninth Circuit has recognized at least in dicta that attorneys’ fees and expenses may be subject to immediate payment under 11 U.S.C. § 365(d)(3). In re Cukierman, 265 F.3d at 852. Although the Ninth Circuit in Cukierman did not ultimately reach the question of attorneys’ fees being part of a lease obligation requiring immediate payment under 11 U.S.C. § 365(d)(3) because the contractual obligation to pay attorney’s fees had not yet arisen at the time the lease was rejected, this court in In re Leather Factory Inc., 475 B.R. 710, 719-720 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.2012) subsequently held that attorneys’ fees payable under a lease are subject to immediate payment under 11 U.S.C. § 365(d)(3). Id. (<HOLDING>). However, 11 U.S.C. § 365(d)(3) applies only
holding that successful rico defendants may receive attorneys fees under federal rule of civil procedure 11 holding trial court erred in awarding attorneys fees to physicians in absence of any evidence of attorneys fees holding that plaintiffs are entitled to attorneys fees for time spent litigating the fees issue on appeal under title viis attorneys fee provision holding that a landlords attorneys fees are entitled to payment under 11 usc  365d3 holding that the party seeking contractual attorneys fees is entitled to a decision on the merits