Relying on its own decision in In re Roberts [229.pdf], the district court reversed a bankruptcy court order denying law firm's application to represent both an individual debtor and her wholly owned corporation. As these debtors' bankruptcy petitions were filed after 11 U.S.C. § 327(c) was amended, employment of counsel was governed by the amendment, which provides that an attorney is not disqualified from employment as debtor's counsel merely because that attorney also represents a creditor, unless another creditor objects. No creditor objected to the employment of debtors' counsel, and the district court considered whether law firm would be representing an interest adverse to the estate of one debtor by representing both. The district court concluded, based on the Roberts case, that law firm was not precluded from being disinterested by representing both debtors.