AT & T and the Debtors to resolve those objections. Ultimately, the objections were resolved in a manner that WTC asserts improved the sale process and the AT & T transaction for the benefit of all creditors of the estate. Resurgence argues that WTC’s efforts with respect to the AT & T sale were largely duplicative of the Committee’s counsel, which has charged over $5 million in these cases. Although the Debtors received $96 million in cash plus other consideration (including a $40 million holdback note) from the sale, there is no evidence what amount was due solely (or even primarily) to WTC’s efforts. In fact, WTC acknowledges that it was one of many parties participating in the negotiations with AT & T. See, e.g., In re Alumni Hotel Corp., 203 B.R. 624, 632 (Bankr. E.D.Mich.1996) (<HOLDING>). Because the Court finds no evidence that
holding creditors obligation to cancel lien not sufficient to make the contract execute ry holding that insurance obligation was primary to indemnity obligation holding that although foreclosure by a senior lienor often wipes out juniorlien interests in the same collateral  it does not discharge the debtors underlying obligation to junior lien creditors holding that encouraging negotiation and proposing agreeable terms is a routine task and often the professional obligation of a creditors counsel holding that the interest of the public  especially the debtor and creditors  could limit compensation to a debtors counsel