Restructuring Environmental Liabilities Spin-off of Profitable Business Found To Be A Fraudulent Transfer Tronox v. Kerr-McGee
|
|
- Rudolph Clark
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Restructuring Environmental Liabilities Spin-off of Profitable Business Found To Be A Fraudulent Transfer Tronox v. Kerr-McGee Vincent J. Roldan Vandenberg & Feliu About the Author: Vincent J. Roldan 98 is a Partner at Vandenberg & Feliu, LLP in New York and specializes in corporate restructuring and Chapter 11 bankruptcy. On December 12, 2013, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York in Tronox Inc. v. Kerr-McGee Corp. 1 issued an important opinion on fraudulent conveyance liability that may affect how large companies address long term environmental and tort remediation obligations. In Tronox, the court ruled that the spin-off of a successful energy business from a troubled chemical business was an actual fraudulent transfer designed to separate the valuable assets from the significant liabilities. The court awarded the creditors up to $14.5 billion in damages, which is apparently the largest environmental bankruptcy award ever. 2 The 112-page opinion was the result of a 34-day trial involving 28 witnesses (including 14 expert witnesses) and 6,100 exhibits. As discussed below, the decision provides an indication of how courts will weigh evidence (or lack thereof) when analyzing a possible fraudulent transfer. Despite substantial documentation in support of their defense, the defendants were unable to prove whether there was any good faith belief that debtor would be able to support environmental and other legacy liabilities that had been imposed upon it. This article explores this issue as well as other certain key issues that participants in transactions with substantial legacy liabilities should consider. The Facts: An M&A Solution to Significant Environmental Exposure Kerr-McGee Corporation ("Kerr-McGee") was an energy and chemical company that had operated since Among other things, Kerr-McGee had a profitable oil and gas exploration and production business (the "E&P Business") and a chemical business (the "Chemical Business"). By 2000, Kerr-McGee faced billions in substantial environmental and tort exposure related to its Chemical Business. Attempts to sell all or part of the company were unsuccessful, in large part due to the substantial environmental risk related to the Chemical Business. One of the rejecting suitors was Anadarko Petroleum Corporation ("Anadarko"), who purportedly passed on the transaction because the future environmental liability was "$BILLIONS" with "no end in sight for at least 30 more years." In response to the rejections by potential acquirers, in 2002 Kerr-McGee began to implement an out-of-court corporate restructuring that was completed in There were several components to the restructuring, each of which was designed to allow Kerr-McGee to separate the valuable E&P Business from the Chemical Business. In 2002, Kerr-McGee 1 Tronox Inc. v. Kerr-McGee Corp., 503 B.R. 239 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2013). 2 Michael Vitti, A Cartoon And Other Takeaways From The Tronox Case, American Bankruptcy Institute Journal (April 2014) (citation omitted). 1
2 transferred the assets relating to the valuable E&P Business to a new parent company ("New Kerr-McGee"). The Chemical Business assets and the concomitant legacy liabilities were left behind at Kerr-McGee, which was later renamed Tronox Worldwide LLC ( Tronox ). In 2005, Tronox incurred approximately $450 million in secured bank debt and issued unsecured notes of $350 million. All but $40 million of the proceeds from these transactions were paid to New Kerr-McGee. Also in November 2005, Tronox was taken public in an initial public offering, yielding approximately $225 million in proceeds that were also paid to New Kerr-McGee. In March 2006, new Kerr-McGee distributed the Tronox stock to its shareholders, completing the spin-off of the Tronox assets (and liabilities) and establishing it as an independent company. Just weeks after the spin-off was concluded, the former suitor, Anadarko, acquired New Kerr-McGee for $18 billion in an all-cash transaction. Tronox continued to limp along for years after being spun off, ultimately filing for bankruptcy in Tronox and related entities filed a fraudulent conveyance lawsuit against the parties involved in the prior spin off transactions, seeking to avoid the transfers of the valuable assets and over $15 billion in damages. This litigation was transferred to a litigation trust created pursuant to the Tronox plan of reorganization, which provided the environmental creditors with the proceeds of the fraudulent conveyance litigation. The Impact: Relevant Legal Conclusions and Lessons The Tronox decision is comprehensive and complex, addressing, among other things, fraudulent conveyance, valuation and jurisdictional issues. The lawsuit alleged that the separation of the E&P Business from the Chemical Business and subsequent sale of the E&P Business to Anadarko was an actual and constructive fraudulent conveyance. Before getting to those fraudulent conveyance issues, the court had to deal with a statute of limitations issue because Tronox filed for bankruptcy in January The applicable claw-back period would encompass the 2005 IPO, but not the 2002 spin-off if that transfer was treated as a separate distinct transaction. Collapsing Transaction Doctrine The Tronox court ruled that the series of restructuring transactions that Kerr-McGee began in 2002 and ended in 2005 were part of a single integrated scheme, and collapsed the entire transaction for purposes of a statute of limitations analysis. The court looked to evidence, including board presentations, in 2000 and 2001 discussing the spin-off with an express purpose of limiting environmental and tort liabilities. Ultimately, the court found overwhelming evidence that the 2002 transaction was part of a single integrated scheme to create an E&P Business free and clear of legacy liabilities. 3 This permitted the court to move beyond the 4-year statute of limitations applicable under Oklahoma state law, and include the transactions that occurred prior as part of the overall transaction. 4 3 Tronox, 503 B.R. at This portion of the Tronox decision is a reminder that potential buyers should be cognizant of the transactions that occurred prior to the applicable statute of limitation period. 2
3 Actual Fraudulent Transfer The plaintiffs alleged that the transfers of property that culminated in the spin-off were made with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud a creditor within the meaning of section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code, and the equivalent Oklahoma statute. After reviewing the substantial evidence presented, the Tronox court found that the transactions were done with an actual intent to hinder or delay creditors. The court recognized that a transfer may be made without fraudulent intent even if a debtor did not intend to harm creditors, where it knew that by entering into the transaction, creditors would inevitably be hindered, delayed or defrauded. Here, there was ample evidence in the record that a principal goal of the separation of the E&P Business from the Chemical Business was to cleanse the E&P asserts of legacy liabilities, in order to make the cleansed company more attractive as an acquisition target. 5 Thus, the court found that even without an analysis of badges of fraud, 6 there was evidence of actual fraudulent intent. For good measure, the court analyzed and found evidence establishing "badges of fraud," including (i) the transferee was an insider, (ii) the debtor retained complete control of the property after the transfer, (iii) disclosures regarding the 2002 transaction were insubstantial and ineffective, and (iv) before the transfer was made, the debtor was involved for years in environmental and tort liability litigation. 7 Among other defenses, the defendants argued that the parties believed that Tronox was viable. The Tronox court rejected several of the defendants' arguments in support. The court said that the issue is not whether Tronox was doomed to fail, nor whether the defendants wanted Tronox to be a big success. 8 Instead, the court said the real issue was whether there was evidence of any good faith belief that Tronox would be able to support environmental liabilities. The court found no such evidence of any contemporaneous analysis, which the court to be extraordinary. 9 The defendants used analyses prepared by the Kerr-McGee chief accounting officer and accountants and a cash flow analysis, but the court did not find either to be persuasive evidence of Tronox s ability to support the legacy liabilities. For instance, the accounting analysis only opined that Tronox would be able to survive for one year, which is not necessarily evidence of Tronox s ability to survive as a standalone entity. Similarly, the cash flow analysis was not sufficiently thorough. It predicted that environmental expenses would be zero in 2010, and absurd result according to the court. 10 Defendants also supported submitted a solvency opinion, to show that the defendants believed Tronox was viable and creditors would not be adversely affected after the spin-off. The court rejected this defense largely because the financial advisor relied upon Company 5 Id. at Badges of fraud are circumstances so commonly associated with fraudulent transfers that their presence gives rise to an inference of fraudulent intent. Id. at Id. at Id. at Id. at Id. at
4 management's estimates of the environmental and tort liability, which the court found to be of no probative value in determining liability for solvency/fraudulent conveyance purposes. 11 The court also rejected the defendants' claims that the spin-off was intended to create two successful standalone companies, in order to maximize shareholder value. The court pointed out that every legacy liability was imposed on Tronox, though at one time the legacy liabilities had been proposed to be allocated proportionately to the asset values of the two lines of business. The defendants did not articulate any legitimate business reason for imposing all legacy liabilities on Tronox. Accordingly, the Tronox court found sufficient evidence of intentional fraud to place the burden on the defendants to show a legitimate business purpose for the manner in which the transfer was structured. Here, the defendants failed to meet their burden. In sum, though there was plenty of evidence that Kerr-McGee s sophisticated management gave close attention to fraudulent conveyance issues through research of failed spin-offs and discussions with outside lawyers, the defendants were only able to produce vague, conclusory generalities in support of the position that Kerr-McGee reasonably concluded that the Tronox spin-off could not be challenged on fraudulent conveyance grounds. 12 Constructive Fraudulent Conveyance The plaintiffs also charged that the defendants were liable for constructive fraudulent conveyance. To establish liability under that theory, the plaintiffs had to prove that Tronox received less than reasonably equivalent value for the assets and was insolvent (under any of the balance sheet test, adequate capitalization test or cash flow test). The court had no problem finding that Tronox did not receive reasonably equivalent value. Plaintiffs expert testified that Tronox transferred approximately $17 billion and received only $2.6 billion in return, which numbers were not materially disputed. 13 He arrived at these figures by comparing the E&P Business to seven comparable businesses, and also compared his valuation to estimates conducted by Lehman Brothers and Salomon Smith Barney. The more hotly contested issue was whether Tronox was insolvent as a result of the transfer. The court found that using the defendants most aggressive valuation of Tronox s assets, Tronox s environmental and tort liabilities (approximately $2 billion) far exceeded the value of its assets. The interesting part of the Tronox court's constructive fraudulent conveyance analysis was the rejection of the defendants' market evidence of solvency. The defendants argued that Tronox's successful IPO, offers to purchase the Chemical Business, and Tronox's ability to sell bonds in the market were evidence of the value of the entity at that time. The court rejected the market tests, finding that the expert testimony showed that the financial statements on which the market relied were "inflated, sell-side projections, and that key numbers were imposed" by management. Essentially, the projections relating to the IPO were unreasonable when compared 11 Id. at 287. These estimates were based on Tronox s anticipated contingent liabilities stated as reserves in Tronox s financial statements. There was no dispute that financial statements are of little use in a solvency analysis because generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) only requires reserves for claims that are probable and reasonably estimable. Id. at 301. The court found the record to be replete with evidence that Kerr-McGee misapplied the standard and thereby understated its liabilities for GAAP purposes. 12 Id. at Id. at
5 with Tronox s historical performance. In addition, the financial statements omitted certain critical contingencies and potential liabilities. There was no contention that Tronox s financial statements discussed all legacy liabilities in any manner useful to determining solvency. Next, the defendants offered as evidence of solvency the testimony from management that at the time of the spin-off, Tronox employees believed Tronox was solvent and not doomed to fail. This type of evidence was undermined by other evidence that others in management saw disaster on the horizon and recommended steps to address it. For instance, shortly after the spinoff, Tronox s new head of environmental remediation advocated that Tronox sue Kerr-McGee to address the environmental liabilities. In any event, the optimism of some of Tronox s management is no better proof of solvency than the despair of others. 14 Conclusion The Tronox case is significant for several reasons, but primarily as an example of the type of evidence that a bankruptcy court may consider in evaluating transactions designed to limit particular legacy liabilities. Courts will thoroughly review presentations from advisors to the board, comments made by management to the proposed presentations and opinions, and all available documentation to determine whether the board considered the impact of the transaction on the legacy company (and creditors). The Tronox decision will significantly impact how most financial actors evaluate fraudulent transfer risks involved in any transaction, including spin-offs, leveraged buy outs and dividend recapitalizations. 14 Id. at
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Tronox v. Kerr-McGee: Game Changing Ruling on Fraudulent Transfer and Spin-Offs to Shed Legacy Liabilities Navigating Complex Issues of Fraudulent
More informationFraudulent Conveyance Litigation and Valuation: Tronox
Fraudulent Conveyance Litigation and Valuation: Tronox Moderator: Grant T. Stein Alston & Bird, LLP, Atlanta, Georgia Panelists: Professor Grant W. Newton, AIRA, Medford, Oregon Professor Jack F. Williams,
More informationManagement Alert. How Long and Strong is Trustee Piccard s Claw?
How Long and Strong is Trustee Piccard s Claw? On December 10, 2008, Bernard Madoff confessed to his two sons that he had been running what amounted to a massive Ponzi scheme on the scale of approximately
More informationBankruptcy Litigation Services
Bankruptcy Litigation Services Providing sophisticated support for complex bankruptcy litigation matters Deloitte CRG Deloitte Transactions and Business Analytics LLP Bankruptcy-related litigation presents
More informationPart 1: Caesars Liquidity and Solvency
Part 1: Caesars Liquidity and Solvency Published on Alvarez & Marsal (https://www.alvarezandmarsal.com) Caesars Entertainment Operating Company ( CEOC or the Debtor ) filed for bankruptcy protection on
More informationJointly Administered. - against - Adv. Proc. No (ALG) Plaintiff-Intervenor,
LEV L. DASSIN Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York By: MATTHEW L. SCHWARTZ TOMOKO ONOZAWA Assistant United States Attorneys 86 Chambers Street New York, New York 10007 Tel.:
More informationUnited States Financial Assistance IBA Corporate and M&A Law Committee 2013
United States Financial Assistance IBA Corporate and M&A Law Committee 2013 Contact James M. Sullivan (Partner) Moses & Singer LLP jsullivan@mosessinger.com Contents Page INTRODUCTION 2 GENERAL OVERVIEW
More informationNarrowing the Scope of Auditor Duties
Narrowing the Scope of Auditor Duties David Margulies, J.D. Candidate 2010 The tort of deepening insolvency refers to an action asserted by a representative of a bankruptcy estate against directors, officers,
More informationHow did you go bankrupt? Bill asked. Two ways, Mike said. Gradually and then suddenly. -Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises (1926)
Solvency Opinions Uses & Issues How did you go bankrupt? Bill asked. Two ways, Mike said. Gradually and then suddenly. -Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises (1926) Hemingway, in his economic style, illustrates
More informationAdministrating Ponzi Schemes
Administrating Ponzi Schemes Moderator: Timothy Martin, CIRA Huron Business Advisory Panelists: Hon. Robert E. Grossman U.S. Bankruptcy Court, EDNY Michael Goldberg, Esq. Akerman, LLP S. Gregory Hays,
More informationFRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE BASICS AND AVOIDING POST-CLOSING LITIGATION CHALLENGES TO AN ASSET SALE
FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE BASICS AND AVOIDING POST-CLOSING LITIGATION CHALLENGES TO AN ASSET SALE California s Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act ( UFTA ) has long set forth the legal components necessary to
More informationLimiting the Scope of the Value Defense under 11 U.S.C. 548(c) in Avoidance Litigation. Allison Smalley, J.D. Candidate 2018
Limiting the Scope of the Value Defense under 11 U.S.C. 548(c) in Avoidance Litigation Introduction 2017 Volume IX No. 25 Limiting the Scope of the Value Defense under 11 U.S.C. 548(c) in Avoidance Litigation
More informationAn Economist s View of Market Evidence in Valuation and Bankruptcy Litigation
22 May 2014 An Economist s View of Market Evidence in Valuation and Bankruptcy Litigation By Faten Sabry and William P. Hrycay Courts often face many challenges when assessing the solvency of a company
More informationCash Collateral Orders Revisited Following ResCap
Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Cash Collateral Orders Revisited Following ResCap
More informationLitigation Trustees Not Allowed to Wear Their Non-Bankruptcy Hats to Avoid Swap Transactions as Fraudulent Conveyances
2014 Volume VI No. 15 Litigation Trustees Not Allowed to Wear Their Non-Bankruptcy Hats to Avoid Swap Transactions as Fraudulent Conveyances Aura M. Gomez Lopez, J. D. Candidate 2015 Cite as: Litigation
More informationA Bankruptcy Perspective in Valuation Engagements In Good Times and in Bad Times
A Bankruptcy Perspective in Valuation Engagements In Good Times and in Bad Times American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Webinar Series February 10, 2010 R. James Alerding CPA/ABV, ASA, CVA,
More informationASSET PROTECTION PLANNING
I. INTRODUCTION ASSET PROTECTION PLANNING Gideon Rothschild Moses & Singer LLP grothschild@mosessinger.com A. The Current Litigation Environment Creates Greater Exposure to Risk of Loss Than Ever Before:
More informationAn Overview CYPRESS ASSOCIATES LLC 52 VANDERBILT AVENUE NEW YORK, NY Tel: Fax:
An Overview CYPRESS ASSOCIATES LLC 52 VANDERBILT AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10017 Tel: 212.682.2222 Fax: 212.682.2221 contact@cyprs.com www.cyprs.com Member FINRA/SIPC Table of Contents Introduction 3 I. Mergers
More informationServices and Capabilities. Bankruptcy and Financial Distress Litigation
Services and Capabilities Bankruptcy and Financial Distress Litigation Our team of experts offers an unmatched combination of economic credentials, industry expertise, and testifying experience. BANKRUPTCY
More informationIntercreditor Agreements After Momentive: When a Hindrance Is Not a Hindrance
Legal Update December 13, 2018 Intercreditor Agreements After Momentive: When a Hindrance Is Not a Hindrance Intercreditor agreements contracts that lay out the respective rights, obligations and priorities
More informationJOSEPH M. MCLAUGHLIN *
DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS LIABILITY THE DEEPENING INSOLVENCY DEBATE JOSEPH M. MCLAUGHLIN * SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP APRIL 12, 2007 Although there is considerable recognition that the deepening insolvency
More information2.02 Spin-Off Transactions
2.02 Spin-Off Transactions [1] Basic Structure In the typical spin-off transaction, the parent company distributes all of the stock of a subsidiary to the parent stockholders in the form of a pro rata
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re ) Chapter 11 ) SP NEWSPRINT HOLDINGS LLC, et al., ) Case No. 11-13649 (CSS) ) Debtors. ) Jointly Administered ) Hearing Date: February
More informationWhen Trouble Knocks, Will Directors and Officers Policies Answer?
When Trouble Knocks, Will Directors and Officers Policies Answer? Michael John Miguel Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP Los Angeles, California The limit of liability theory lies within the imagination of the
More information: In re: : Chapter 11 : BAYOU GROUP, LLC, et al., : Case No.: (ASH) : Debtors. : Jointly Administered :
DECHERT LLP 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, New York 10112 Telephone: (212) 698-3500 Facsimile: (212) 698-3599 H. Jeffrey Schwartz (HJS-4105) Gary J. Mennitt (GM-1141) Elise Scherr Frejka (ESF-6896) Jonathan
More informationTHE FACTS THE DECISION
Securities Client Advisory March 7, 2005 IN RE WORLDCOM, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION DUE DILIGENCE FOR UNDERWRITERS AND DIRECTORS Late last year, the Southern District of New York decided a significant
More informationA Prime Brokers Good Faith Defense to Fraudulent Transfers
A Prime Brokers Good Faith Defense to Fraudulent Transfers Michael Maffei, J.D. Candidate 2010 The exposure of Madoff Ponzi scheme, and others like it, will undoubtedly have an impact on the way that bankruptcy
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, Appellant, v. Case No. 12-C-0659 DANIEL W. BRUCKNER, Appellee. DECISION AND ORDER The Federal National
More informationAlert. Fifth Circuit Orders Mandatory Subordination of Contractual Guaranty Claims. June 5, 2015
Alert Fifth Circuit Orders Mandatory Subordination of Contractual Guaranty Claims June 5, 2015 A creditor s guaranty claim arising from equity investments in a debtor s affiliate should be treated the
More informationToo Much Insolvency: Unmatured Interest and Debt Under the Code. J. B. Heaton * Abstract
Too Much Insolvency: Unmatured Interest and Debt Under the Code J. B. Heaton * Abstract An unacknowledged fact about the Bankruptcy Code s definition of insolvent is that it requires unmatured interest
More informationCase PJW Doc 762 Filed 07/29/13 Page 1 of 20 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 13-10061-PJW Doc 762 Filed 07/29/13 Page 1 of 20 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ------------------------------------------------------x In re : Chapter 11 : Penson
More informationlitigation and investigation services when the stakes are high, every decision is critical
litigation and investigation services when the stakes are high, every decision is critical LITIGATION SERVICES ECONOMIC DAMAGES VALUATION SERVICES FORENSIC & INVESTIGATIVE ACCOUNTING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
More informationLEGAL EDGE. Anadarko Petroleum Corp. (APC): Preview of April 4 Tronox Hearing March 28, 2014 CFRA LEGAL EDGE
LEGAL EDGE Anadarko Petroleum Corp. (APC): Preview of April 4 Tronox Hearing THE BRIEF We maintain Anadarko at Actionable Positive into Friday April 4 hearing in the Tronox fraudulent transfer case KEY
More informationCase 3:10-cv JWS Document 62 Filed 03/12/12 Page 1 of 9
Case :0-cv-0-JWS Document Filed 0// Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, :0-cv-0 JWS vs. ORDER AND OPINION JOSEPH LIPARI, et al., [Re: Motions
More informationCase KG Doc 576 Filed 07/16/18 Page 1 of 21 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 18-10834-KG Doc 576 Filed 07/16/18 Page 1 of 21 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: Chapter 11 VER TECHNOLOGIES HOLDCO LLC, et al., 1 Case No. 18-10834 (KG Debtors.
More informationFAIRNESS OPINIONS: A Brief Primer 1
FAIRNESS OPINIONS: A Brief Primer UNDERSTANDING THE CHANGING TRANSACTION LANDSCAPE For more than 30 years, fairness opinions have played an integral role in merger and acquisition (M&A) and related corporate
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT RICHARD B.WEBBER, II, as the Chapter 7 Trustee for FREDERICK J. KEITEL, III, and FJK IV PROPERTIES, INC., a Florida corporation, Jointly
More informationFRAUDULENT TRANSFER RISK IN M&A AND LOAN TRANSACTIONS
FRAUDULENT TRANSFER RISK IN M&A AND LOAN TRANSACTIONS November 19, 2015 Mindy F. Rice 414-298-8301 mrice@reinhartlaw.com 1000 North Water Street, Suite 1700, Milwaukee, WI 53202 www.reinhartlaw.com Webinar
More informationsmb Doc Filed 09/27/18 Entered 09/27/18 13:05:26 Main Document Pg 1 of 12
Pg 1 of 12 Baker & Hostetler LLP Hearing Date: October 31, 2018 45 Rockefeller Plaza Hearing Time: 10:00 a.m. (EST) New York, New York 10111 Objections Due: October 23, 2018 Telephone: (212) 589-4200 Objection
More informationINSTRUCTION LETTER TRONOX TORT CLAIMS TRUST INSTRUCTION LETTER (CATEGORY D) Dear Prospective Claimant or Claimant Counsel,
INSTRUCTION LETTER Dear Prospective Claimant or Claimant Counsel, The Tronox Incorporated Tort Claims Trust (the Trust ) has been established under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code to resolve all Tort
More informationBankruptcy Court Holds that Detroit Is Eligible to File for Chapter 9 Protection
December 11, 2013 Bankruptcy Court Holds that Detroit Is Eligible to File for Chapter 9 Protection The birthplace of the American auto industry now holds another, less fortunate distinction, that of being
More informationCase 2:16-cv JCM-CWH Document 53 Filed 07/30/18 Page 1 of 7. Plaintiff(s),
Case :-cv-0-jcm-cwh Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA * * * 0 RUSSELL PATTON, v. Plaintiff(s), FINANCIAL BUSINESS AND CONSUMER SOLUTIONS, INC, Defendant(s). Case
More informationHolding Debt and Equity Investments in a Financially Distressed Company May Survive Recharacterization Claims
T O O U R F R I E N D S A N D C L I E N T S M e m o r a n d u m December 8, 2006 www.friedfrank.com Holding Debt and Equity Investments in a Financially Distressed Company May Survive Recharacterization
More informationThe Continuing Importance of Process in Entire Fairness Review: In re Nine Systems
The Continuing Importance of Process in Entire Fairness Review: In re Nine Systems By Krishna Veeraraghavan and Scott Crofton of Sullivan & Cromwell LLP In a decision with significant implications for
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
STATE FARM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. MOSTAK et al Doc. 44 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA STATE FARM LIFE INSURANCE : COMPANY : Plaintiff, : CIVIL ACTION :
More informationKupetz v. Wolf 845 F.2d 842 (9th Cir. 1988) SNEED, Circuit Judge: The district court, by way of a summary judgment and directed verdict, determined
Kupetz v. Wolf 845 F.2d 842 (9th Cir. 1988) SNEED, Circuit Judge: The district court, by way of a summary judgment and directed verdict, determined that the bankrupt made neither fraudulent conveyances
More informationlaw are made pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure IN RE: MICHAEL A. SCOTT and PATRICIA J. SCOTT, Debtors.
IN RE: MICHAEL A. SCOTT and PATRICIA J. SCOTT, Debtors. PATRICIA J. SCOTT, Plaintiff, v. CALIBER HOME LOANS, INC., Defendant. Case No. 09-11123-M Adv. No. 14-01040-M UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR
More informationTesting the Limits of Lender Liability in Distressed-Loan Situations. July/August Debra K. Simpson Mark G. Douglas
Testing the Limits of Lender Liability in Distressed-Loan Situations July/August 2007 Debra K. Simpson Mark G. Douglas As has been well-publicized recently, businesses are increasingly turning to private
More informationSurviving Daubert Age onic eet B y D o n a l D M. M a y Securities in the Electr all Str : The Benchmarking Method Must Match the Type of Case
LAWYER Securities in the Electronic Age Wall Street Surviving Daubert: Bad Benchmarking Puts Cases at Risk Expert Witnesses Misstep by Using the Wrong Benchmarks to Calculate Damages By Donald M. May To
More informationConfirming the Plan: The Absolute Priority Rule Problem. Anne Lawton*
Confirming the Plan: The Absolute Priority Rule Problem By Anne Lawton* On December 8, 2014, the American Bankruptcy Institute Commission to Study the Reform of Chapter 11 ( Commission ) released its Final
More informationConstruing Substantial Contribution Under Section 503(b)(3)(D) May/June Jennifer L. Seidman
Construing Substantial Contribution Under Section 503(b)(3)(D) May/June 2012 Jennifer L. Seidman In keeping with the courts narrow construction of what constitutes substantial contribution in a chapter
More informationRe: Issue Number: (Bankruptcy Credit Event in respect of Sears Roebuck Acceptance Corporation)
To: DC Secretary Re: Issue Number: 2018101502 (Bankruptcy Credit Event in respect of Sears Roebuck Acceptance Corporation) Date: November 13, 2018 Pursuant to Rule 3.3(d) of the 2018 ISDA Credit Derivatives
More informationPost-Closing Earnouts in M&A Transactions: Avoiding Common Disputes
Post-Closing Earnouts in M&A Transactions: Avoiding Common Disputes Winter 2011 Kevin R. Shannon and Michael K. Reilly are partners in the Wilmington, Delaware law firm of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP.
More informationMORTGAGE FRAUD by Thomas J. Methvin Beasley, Wilson, Allen, Main & Crow, P.C. This paper deals with what has commonly been called Mortgage
MORTGAGE FRAUD by Thomas J. Methvin Beasley, Wilson, Allen, Main & Crow, P.C. This paper deals with what has commonly been called Mortgage Fraud. It does not deal with all potential types of fraud involving
More informationAppellate Decision in TOUSA Bankruptcy Protects Secured Lenders
Appellate Decision in TOUSA Bankruptcy Protects Secured Lenders This article first appeared in Corporate Rescue and Insolvency - International, June 1, 2011. by Craig A. Barbarosh, Karen B. Dine, Erica
More informationThe definitive source of actionable intelligence on hedge fund law and regulation. Reclamation Rights
The definitive source of CLAIMS TRADING How Claim Traders Can Pursue Reclamation and Administrative Expense Claims in Retail and Other Insolvencies By Darius J. Goldman, Matthew W. Olsen and Jessica P.
More informationDCF Analysis: A Commercially Reasonable Determinant of Value for Liquidation of Mortgage Loans in Repo Transaction.
DCF Analysis: A Commercially Reasonable Determinant of Value for Liquidation of Mortgage Loans in Repo Transaction July/August 2011 Benjamin Rosenblum In a case of first impression, the Third Circuit Court
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. v. MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER Civil File No (MJD/JSM)
Perrill et al v. Equifax Information Services, LLC Doc. 47 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA DAVID A. PERRILL and GREGORY PERRILL, Plaintiffs, v. MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER Civil File No.
More informationASSET PROTECTION for BUSINESS OWNERS
ASSET PROTECTION for BUSINESS OWNERS Brian S. Mandel, Esq. Certified Specialist Estate Planning, Trust, and Probate Law 7700 Irvine Center Drive, #800 Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 660-0007 Some Scary Stats 70,000
More informationCase Study: In Re Visteon Corp.
Portfolio Media, Inc. 860 Broadway, 6 th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 reprints@portfoliomedia.com Case Study: In Re Visteon Corp. Law360, New York (August 12, 2010) --
More informationRicciardi v. Ameriquest Mtg Co
2006 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1-17-2006 Ricciardi v. Ameriquest Mtg Co Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 05-1409 Follow
More informationalg Doc 4468 Filed 07/29/13 Entered 07/29/13 16:17:20 Main Document Pg 1 of 17. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT Hearing Date: August 5, 2013
Pg 1 of 17 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT Hearing Date: August 5, 2013 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Hearing Time: 11:00 a.m. ------------------------------------------------------x : In re : Chapter 11
More informationHONEY WE CAN CANCEL OUR TRIP TO THE COOK ISLANDS MICHIGAN HAS AN ASSET PROTECTION TRUST STATUTE!
HONEY WE CAN CANCEL OUR TRIP TO THE COOK ISLANDS MICHIGAN HAS AN ASSET PROTECTION TRUST STATUTE! By: Geoffrey N. Taylor, Esq. I. INTRODUCTION A. On my list of favorite estate planning myths, number one
More informationNOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 14a0911n.06. No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 14a0911n.06 No. 14-5212 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT THOMAS EIFLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WILSON & MUIR BANK & TRUST CO.,
More informationFraudulent Conveyance Exposure for Intercorporate Guaranties, Integrated Transactions and Designated-Use Loans
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Fraudulent Conveyance Exposure for Intercorporate Guaranties, Integrated Transactions and Designated-Use Loans Navigating the Contours of Section
More informationDEEPENING INSOLVENCY AS A CAUSE OF ACTION AND AS A THEORY OF DAMAGES
DEEPENING INSOLVENCY AS A CAUSE OF ACTION AND AS A THEORY OF DAMAGES Shell Games Ponzi Scheme Cases: The Liability of Investors, Sales Agents, Professionals and Others By: Kathy Bazoian Phelps Danning,
More information2012 ANNUAL MEETING AND EDUCATION CONFERENCE American College of Investment Counsel New York, NY
2012 ANNUAL MEETING AND EDUCATION CONFERENCE American College of Investment Counsel New York, NY SESSION 5: GUARANTEES AND SECURITY: VALUATION, ENFORCEABILITY, LIMITS ON GRANTING AND AVOIDANCE RISK POST
More informationCase Management and Health Claims in Toxic Tort Litigation
ALI-ABA Course of Study Environmental and Toxic Tort Litigation January 26-27, 2006 Scottsdale, Arizona Case Management and Health Claims in Toxic Tort Litigation By D. Alan Rudlin George P. Sibley, III
More informationNC General Statutes - Chapter 39 Article 3A 1
Article 3A. Uniform Voidable Transactions Act. 39-23.1. Definitions. In this Article, the following definitions apply: (1) Affiliate. Any of the following: a. A person that directly or indirectly owns,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Chapter 11 RE: D.I. 1984
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: KB Toys, Inc., et al., Debtors. Chapter 11 Case No. 04-10120 (DDS (Jointly Administered RE: D.I. 1984 OPPOSITION OF BAIN CAPITAL
More informationIN RYAN V. LYONDELL CHEMICAL COMPANY, THE DELAWARE CHANCERY COURT REMINDS DIRECTORS THAT SALE OF CONTROL TRANSACTIONS REQUIRE ROBUST BOARD INVOLVEMENT
CLIENT MEMORANDUM IN RYAN V. LYONDELL CHEMICAL COMPANY, THE DELAWARE CHANCERY COURT REMINDS DIRECTORS THAT SALE OF CONTROL TRANSACTIONS REQUIRE ROBUST BOARD INVOLVEMENT On July 29, 2008, the Delaware Chancery
More informationFinancial Adviser Procedures Related to
Bankruptcy Valuation 57 Financial Adviser Procedures Related to Bankruptcy-Related Solvency Opinions Katherine Gilbert Bankruptcy-related solvency opinion issues can be rather complicated. Debtor corporation
More informationPresented By: Jeffrey R. Matsen. November, 2009, Jeffrey R. Matsen
INTRODUCTION TO ASSET PROTECTION PLANNING Presented By: Jeffrey R. Matsen November, 2009, Jeffrey R. Matsen 1 What Is Fully Integrated Estate Planning? Planning for the orderly disposition of assets at
More informationIN THE OREGON TAX COURT REGULAR DIVISION Property Tax
IN THE OREGON TAX COURT REGULAR DIVISION Property Tax JESUS A. YANEZ, and JUDITH D. YANEZ Plaintiffs, TC 4711 v. OPINION AND ORDER WASHINGTON COUNTY ASSESSOR and DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, State of Oregon,
More informationBusiness Bankruptcy and Creditors Rights Issues
Business Bankruptcy and Creditors Rights Issues AGENDA I. Introduction V. Fraudulent Transfers II. Bankruptcy Overview a. History of Bankruptcy Code b. Types of Bankruptcies a. Intent to Defraud b. Defenses
More informationIndemnification: Forgotten D&O Protection
Indemnification: Forgotten D&O Protection In the current post-enron environment, directors and officers increasingly realize, perhaps more than ever before, that absent strong financial protection, their
More informationAnother Page In The Issuer-Bondholder Playbook
Portfolio Media. Inc. 111 West 19 th Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10011 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Another Page In The Issuer-Bondholder Playbook
More informationPonzi Scheme Transfers by Hedgefund to Broker Avoided in Bankruptcy. March/April Bronson J. Bigelow Mark G. Douglas
Ponzi Scheme Transfers by Hedgefund to Broker Avoided in Bankruptcy March/April 2007 Bronson J. Bigelow Mark G. Douglas In a decision with potential far-reaching effects on Wall Street firms servicing
More informationDEEPENING INSOLVENCY A RESTRUCTURING LAWYER S PERSPECTIVE
DEEPENING INSOLVENCY A RESTRUCTURING LAWYER S PERSPECTIVE PRESENTATION OUTLINE 1 Richard M. Cieri Ray C. Schrock Paul Wierbicki Kirkland & Ellis LLP 1 This presentation outline may be supplemented and
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 14-3435 1756 W. LAKE STREET LLC, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, AMERICAN CHARTERED BANK and SCHERSTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS, LLC, Defendants-Appellees.
More informationWHAT DOES IT MEAN TO EXHAUST AN UNDERLYING LAYER OF INSURANCE?
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO EXHAUST AN UNDERLYING LAYER OF INSURANCE? By Robert M. Hall Mr. Hall is an attorney, a former law firm partner, a former insurance and reinsurance executive and acts as an insurance
More informationEXPANDING FOREIGN CREDITORS TOOLKIT: THE PRESUMPTION AGAINST EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION
EXPANDING FOREIGN CREDITORS TOOLKIT: THE PRESUMPTION AGAINST EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION Craig R. Bergmann * I. INTRODUCTION... 84 II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY... 84 III. THE PRESUMPTION AGAINST EXTRATERRITORIAL
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT WELLS FARGO EQUIPMENT FINANCE, INC., Appellant, v. BACJET, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, BERNARD A. CARBALLO, CARBALLO VENTURES,
More informationRECOGNIZING THE SIGNS OF IMPENDING BANKRUPTCY
Tricks or Treats? Getting Paid When Your Tenants, Suppliers, Clients and Businesses Declare Bankruptcy Max Moseley 205. 244.3817 mmoseley@bakerdonelson.com Jan Hayden 504.566.8645 jhayden@bakerdonelson.com
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) In re: ) Chapter 11 ) TRONOX INCORPORATED, et al., 1 ) Case No. 09-10156 (ALG) ) Debtors. ) Jointly Administered ) FIRST AMENDED JOINT PLAN
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN BAY CITY
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN BAY CITY IN RE: Kevin W. Kulek / RANDALL L. FRANK, TRUSTEE, Plaintiff, V Chapter 7 Petition 16-21030-dob Honorable Daniel Opperman Adversary
More informationCase Document 555 Filed in TXSB on 10/10/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 18-33836 Document 555 Filed in TXSB on 10/10/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION In re: NEIGHBORS LEGACY HOLDINGS, INC., et al., Debtors. 1 Chapter
More informationAlert. Lower Courts Wrestle with Debtors Tuition Payments. December 12, 2018
Alert Lower Courts Wrestle with Debtors Tuition Payments December 12, 2018 Two courts have added to the murky case law addressing a bankruptcy trustee s ability to recover a debtor s tuition payments for
More informationLitigation Valuation REPORT. Quantifying the value of customer relationships. Active vs. passive appreciation. Just awards
March/April 2011 & Litigation Valuation REPORT Quantifying the value of customer relationships Active vs. passive appreciation A deceptively complex issue in divorce cases Just awards Construct a framework
More informationThe Investment Lawyer
The Investment Lawyer Covering Legal and Regulatory Issues of Asset Management VOL. 24, NO. 6 JUNE 2017 Business Development Company Update: Excessive Fees Lawsuit Against Adviser Dismissed By Kenneth
More informationwhich define material participation and which were written in 1986.
which define material participation and which were written in 1986. As a corollary, Stuart Hurwitz stated that the issue is what is arbitrary and capricious in terms of the regulations the Service has
More informationCASE LAW UPDATE: A SURVEY OF RECENT TEXAS PARTNERSHIP AND LLC CASES
CASE LAW UPDATE: A SURVEY OF RECENT TEXAS PARTNERSHIP AND LLC CASES By Elizabeth S. Miller Professor of Law Baylor University School of Law Waco, Texas The University of Texas School of Law 2017 LLCs,
More informationThe definitive source of actionable intelligence on hedge fund law and regulation
DERIVATIVE SUITS Derivative Actions and Books and Records Demands Involving Hedge Funds By Thomas K. Cauley, Jr. and Courtney A. Rosen Sidley Austin LLP This article explores the use of derivative actions
More informationFRAUDULENT TRANSFER PRESENT CREDITORS TRANSFER TO INSIDER WHILE INSOLVENT. 1
Page 1 of 5 814.75 FRAUDULENT TRANSFER PRESENT CREDITORS TRANSFER TO INSIDER 1 The (state number) issue reads: Was (name debtor's) transfer of the (name asset) a voidable transaction? On this issue the
More informationSprint Session A 2:40-3:10 p.m. Salon 3. Bankruptcy 101. Panelists: Ryan J. Richmond Attorney at Law Baton Rouge
Sprint Session A 2:40-3:10 p.m. Salon 3 Bankruptcy 101 Panelists: Ryan J. Richmond Attorney at Law Baton Rouge Lacey E. Rochester Baker Donelson New Orleans Ryan J. Richmond Ryan is a 2006 graduate of
More informationIntangible Asset Valuations in Health Care Industry Transactions
Corporate Transaction Pricing and Structuring Insights Intangible Asset Valuations in Health Care Industry Transactions Robert F. Reilly, CPA Financial advisers routinely assist the various parties to
More informationI. Introduction. Appeals this year was Fisher v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 2015 COA
Fisher v. State Farm: A Case Analysis September 2015 By David S. Canter I. Introduction One of the most important opinions to be handed down from the Colorado Court of Appeals this year was Fisher v. State
More informationLEWISTON STATE BANK V. GREENLINE EQUIPMENT, L.L.C. 147 P.3d 951 (Utah Ct. App. 2006)
LEWISTON STATE BANK V. GREENLINE EQUIPMENT, L.L.C. 147 P.3d 951 (Utah Ct. App. 2006) GREENWOOD, Associate Presiding Judge: Defendant Greenline Equipment, L.L.C. (Greenline) appeals the trial court s grant
More informationK. Luke Houston. K. Luke Houston, continued Page 1
Page 1 K. Luke Houston Mr. Houston is a Manager at Rocky Mountain Advisory. Prior to joining Rocky Mountain Advisory, he worked for approximately four years in public accounting providing audit and tax
More informationASSIGNMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF CREDITORS, STATE COURT RECEIVERSHIPS, AND BANKRUPTCY OPTIONS 2009 SOUTHEASTERN BANKRUPTCY LAW INSTITUTE
ASSIGNMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF CREDITORS, STATE COURT RECEIVERSHIPS, AND BANKRUPTCY OPTIONS 2009 SOUTHEASTERN BANKRUPTCY LAW INSTITUTE PROF. JACK F. WILLIAMS, JD, CIRA RESIDENT SCHOLAR, AMERICAN BANKRUPTCY
More information