In considering a fifth fee application from counsel for the debtor-in-possession, the court emphasized that professionals who represent a bankruptcy estate are held to high fiduciary standards and act as officers of the court. The task presented by the fee application before it was described by the court as requiring it to ascertain whether the fees sought were for necessary and appropriate legal services in pursuit of legitimate reorganization of the debtor, or were for conduct "designed to deliberately sabotage efforts to ascertain the truth" of debtor's financial state. Based on a report prepared by an examiner who was appointed to conduct an extensive evaluation of debtor's business affairs, the court concluded that the plan and disclosure statement proposed by debtor had been offered for reasons other than the benefit of the estate, and that counsel's efforts had, instead, been aimed at protecting debtor's principals and their status quo. Noting that the Bankruptcy Code imposes numerous limitations on the compensation of court-approved counsel in order to insure the highest standards of ethical conduct, the court held that the magnitude of counsel's and debtor's misrepresentation of facts to the court warranted denial of the fee application before it in its entirety, as well as an order directing the law firms to disgorge all previously awarded fees in the case.