This matter was on appeal from a bankruptcy court ruling that a previously approved contingent fee agreement between debtor and special counsel was void under both California law and the Bankruptcy Code. The district court affirmed, first, because the bankruptcy court correctly ruled, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 328(a), that the agreement was improvident in light of developments not capable of being anticipated at the time the agreement was originally approved. Second, the district court agreed with the bankruptcy court's rulings that the contingent fee agreement was voidable under California's Business and Professional Code, and that debtor was not estopped from repudiating the fee contract. Third, the district court held that the bankruptcy court had not abused its discretion in awarding a "reasonable fee" of $329,713 on counsel's request for $938,617. Finally, the district court determined that the bankruptcy court also did not abuse its discretion by refusing to award prejudgment interest on the fees awarded, since such an award is required to be "otherwise equitable," which it would not have been, given the record of counsel's improper motives in dealings with the debtor.