SemCrude, Setoff, and the Collapsing Triangle: What Contract Parties Should Know

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "SemCrude, Setoff, and the Collapsing Triangle: What Contract Parties Should Know"

Transcription

1 SemCrude, Setoff, and the Collapsing Triangle: What Contract Parties Should Know NORMAN S. ROSENBAUM, ALEXANDRA STEINBERG BARRAGE, AND JORDAN A. WISHNEW Recently, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware held that a valid, prepetition contract cannot vitiate the strict mutuality requirement found in Section 553(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. The authors explain the court s decision and conclude that, after this ruling, contract parties should not rely on a negotiated cross-affiliate setoff the triangle is no longer as sturdy as it may have once seemed. On January 9, 2009, the Honorable Brendan L. Shannon of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware held in SemCrude 1 that a valid, prepetition contract cannot vitiate the strict mutuality requirement found in Section 553(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. In light of SemCrude, enterprises, such as energy trading and marketing companies, who rely on contractually based cross-affiliate or triangular setoff provisions as a means of setting off amounts owed among various entities should re-examine their agreements and reassess their counterparty bankruptcy risk. As SemCrude illustrates, 2 parties should also understand all of the legal remedies including the potential applicability of the safe harbor provisions that may be available to them under the Bankruptcy Code. 341

2 Pratt s Journal of Bankruptcy Law SETOFF AND TRIANGULAR SETOFF DEFINED A setoff in bankruptcy, as defined by Section 553(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, involves the offset of mutual, valid, and enforceable prepetition debts between the same parties in the same capacities i.e., a prepetition debt owing by a creditor ( Party A ) to a debtor ( Party B ) against a prepetition claim of Party A against Party B. 3 The requisite elements of a Section 553 setoff are as follows: The creditor holds a claim against the debtor that arose before the commencement of the case; The creditor owes a debt to the debtor that also arose before the commencement of the case; The claim and debt are mutual; and The claim and debt are each valid and enforceable. 4 Setoff, in effect, elevates an unsecured claim to secured status, to the extent that the debtor has a mutual, prepetition claim against the creditor. 5 Section 553 does not define mutual. The most common use of mutual includes the requirement that the prepetition claim and debt be owed among the same parties and that the parties be acting in the same capacity. 6 By comparison, a triangular setoff typically involves the setoff of a debt owing from Party A to Party B against a debt of Party B owing to an affili- Norman Rosenbaum is a partner in the Bankruptcy and Restructuring Group of Morrison & Foerster LLP in its New York office. Mr. Rosenbaum has extensive experience representing creditors as well as public and private debtors in transactional, litigation, and advisory work relating to Chapter 11 cases, and non-bankruptcy workouts. Alexandra Steinberg Barrage is counsel in the firm s office in Washington, D.C. Her practice focuses on bankruptcy and distressed debt trading. Jordan Wishnew is a senior associate in the firm s New York City office. His practice focuses on representing creditors, creditors committees and other parties in interest in bankruptcy cases and workouts. The authors can be contacted at nrosenbaum@mofo.com, abarrage@mofo.com, and jwishnew@mofo.com, respectively. 342

3 SemCrude, Setoff, and the Collapsing Triangle ate of Party A, rather than directly to Party A. 7 In the energy trading marketplace, triangular setoff is used to manage risk among multiple affiliates trading under the same ultimate parent. Triangular setoff is considered to be a much more efficient means of managing credit exposure and maximizing the efficiency of collateral than limiting setoff to the obligations of the parties under each contract. 8 The need for triangular setoff is even more acute when affiliates share the same guarantor of their obligations. 9 SUMMARY OF JUDGE SHANNON S DECISION Despite the appeal and convenience of triangular setoff, the SemCrude decision should cause contract parties to re-evaluate the risk that triangular setoffs will not be enforceable against a debtor-in-possession. In SemCrude, the court denied the motion of Chevron Products Company ( Chevron ) for relief from the automatic stay in order to set off the balances owed by Sem- Fuel, L.P. ( SemFuel ) and SemStream, L.P. ( SemStream ) to Chevron against the sum Chevron owed to SemCrude, L.P. ( SemCrude ). Specifically, Chevron owed SemCrude approximately $1.4 million for the sale and purchase of crude oil, SemFuel owed Chevron approximately $10.2 million for the delivery and purchase of gasoline, and SemStream owed Chevron approximately $3.3 million for the delivery and purchase of butane. 10 Each of the agreements among Chevron and the SemCrude parties contained identical netting provisions that provided in pertinent part: [I]n the event either party fails to make a timely payment of monies due and owing to the other party, or in the event either party fails to make timely delivery of product or crude oil due and owing to the other party, the other party may offset any deliveries or payments due under this or any other Agreement between the parties and their affiliates. 11 SemCrude and at least seven other parties filed objections to Chevron s motion. The primary focus of these objections was that the triangular setoff sought by Chevron was impermissible because the Bankruptcy Code does not permit parties to contract around the mutuality require- 343

4 Pratt s Journal of Bankruptcy Law ment set forth in Section 553 of the Bankruptcy Code. Chevron relied on a common law exception to the mutuality requirement, which recognized that parties could create mutuality through a contractual arrangement; 12 but upon a closer examination of the precedent cited by Chevron, Judge Shannon stated that in the court s view none of the cited cases actually upheld or enforced an agreement that allows for a triangular setoff; each and every one of the decisions have simply recognized such an exception in the course of denying the requested setoff or finding mutuality independent of the agreement. 13 In the absence of what the court viewed as controlling or persuasive authority concerning the validity of triangular setoffs, Judge Shannon addressed two related questions: (1) may debts owing among different parties be considered mutual when there are contractual netting provisions governing the parties business relationship; and (2) if not, is there a contractual exception to Section 553 s mutuality requirement? 14 Parties Cannot Contract Around Mutuality The court held that non-mutual debts cannot be transformed into a mutual debt under Section 553 simply because a multi-party agreement allows for setoff of non-mutual debts between the parties to the agreement. 15 For debts to be mutual, the debts must be due to and from the same persons in the same capacity. 16 Therefore, Chevron did not have mutuality with SemCrude because even though Chevron owed SemCrude money, SemCrude did not have a debt due and owing to Chevron. The court made an important distinction between a guaranty obligation, which creates a debt between guarantor and creditor, and a setoff agreement, which does not create indebtedness between parties and only provides that a party s receivable may be reduced or eliminated. While there was a debt due from Chevron to SemCrude, as well as debts due from SemStream and SemFuel to Chevron, there was no reciprocal debt owing from SemCrude to Chevron. Even if Chevron had privity of contract with each of the debtors, it lacked the mutuality with SemCrude required by Section 553. As a result, Chevron could not enforce the contractual netting provisions to set off the monies it owed to SemCrude against 344

5 SemCrude, Setoff, and the Collapsing Triangle the monies owed to it by SemFuel and SemStream because its proposed setoff fell outside the express terms of Section 553. There is No Contractual Exception to Mutuality Based on a strict interpretation of Section 553 and for public policy reasons, the court also held that there was no contract exception to the mutuality requirement of Section 553. The court found no indication in the language of the Bankruptcy Code to provide for such an exception. 17 Since Section 553 of the Bankruptcy Code is unambiguous, an expansive reading enlarging a party s setoff right was inappropriate. The court also noted: One of the primary goals if not the primary goal of the [Bankruptcy] Code is to ensure that similarly situated creditors are treated fairly and enjoy an equality of distribution from a debtor absent a compelling reason to depart from this principle. By allowing parties to contract around the mutuality requirement of section 553, one creditor or a handful of creditors could unfairly obtain payment from a debtor at the expense of the debtor s other creditors, thereby upsetting the priority scheme of the Code and reducing the amount available for distribution to all creditors. 18 THE LIMITS OF SEMCRUDE AND THE UNPAID GUARANTEE SCENARIO The court did not specifically address the issue of whether an unpaid guarantee could create mutuality for purposes of Section As the court emphasized, unlike a guarantee of debt, where the guarantor is liable for making a payment on the debt it has guaranteed payment of, an agreement to setoff funds does not create indebtedness from one party to another. 20 That an unpaid guarantee would give rise to indebtedness (whereas a triangular setoff mechanism would not) may suggest that a prepetition guarantee structure could achieve the same result as a triangular setoff 345

6 Pratt s Journal of Bankruptcy Law without impairing the requirements of Section 553. If, for example, SemCrude had guaranteed the debts of SemFuel or SemStream, there may have been mutuality (and therefore, no need for any purported exception to apply) as between Chevron and SemCrude for purposes of Section 553. But because SemGroup was the only guarantor, and SemGroup was not owed a debt by Chevron, the court did not reach a decision on the unpaid guarantee/mutuality issue. SemCrude may, therefore, leave the door open to an argument that mutuality exists between a debtor/guarantor and its nondebtor counterparty to the extent that such parties agreed in a prepetition contract that the debtor/guarantor could aggregate debts owed to and from other debtors for setoff purposes. 21 Although this guarantee structure may appear to be an attractive way to circumvent the mutuality requirement, a court could equally deem it a variation of the same contract around mutuality theme and continue to uphold the strict requirements under Section 553. SAFE HARBOR APPLICABILITY? Chevron filed a motion for reconsideration of the bankruptcy court s decision (the Reconsideration Motion ). In the Reconsideration Motion, Chevron argued that the agreements at issue were safe harbor contracts not subject to the mutuality requirements of Section 553. According to Chevron, the agreements were either forward contracts or swap agreements, and that, in either case, mutuality is no longer relevant. 22 Generally, the safe harbor provisions of the Bankruptcy Code are designed to permit a non-debtor party to terminate and close out a variety of derivative contracts, including repurchase agreements (or repos ), swaps, security contracts, commodity contracts, and forward contracts, notwithstanding the automatic stay 23 or Section 553 of the Bankruptcy Code. 24 The amendments to the Bankruptcy Code implemented by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (the 2005 Amendments ) strengthened and clarified several of the safe harbor provisions. In particular, the 2005 Amendments added Section 561 which specifically preserved the contractual right to terminate, liquidate, accelerate, or offset under a master netting agreement involving a vari- 346

7 SemCrude, Setoff, and the Collapsing Triangle ety of derivative contracts. 25 Through Section 561 and related provisions, Congress expanded cross-product netting by allowing participants to net all qualified financial contracts under a single master agreement without violating the automatic stay. Nevertheless, the safe harbor protections do not appear to apply to cross-affiliate nettings specifically, thereby casting some doubt on whether triangular setoff will ultimately be preserved in the safe harbor context. In denying the Reconsideration Motion, the court did not address the merits of Chevron s safe harbor argument, relying instead on procedural grounds. The court held, among other things, that prior to the Reconsideration Motion, Chevron had at no point alleged that the safe harbor provisions applied, and that the applicable Bankruptcy Rules did not permit the court to address a new legal theory that could have been raised in the first instance. 26 Thus, the question remains: Could Chevron have circumvented the mutuality requirement imposed by the bankruptcy court by relying on the safe harbor provisions? SEMCRUDE S IMPACT Regardless of whether the safe harbor provisions ultimately apply, SemCrude will be hailed by some as the first definitive case after decades of jurisprudence on triangular setoff, mutuality, and its purported exceptions. As noted in Judge Shannon s opinion, the court believed that each and every prior decision simply recognized a mutuality exception in the course of denying the requested setoff or finding mutuality independent of the agreement. None actually permitted a triangular setoff or, until SemCrude, addressed the merits of this purported exception in a written opinion. 27 Equally as important, the court s rejection of a contractual exception to the mutual debt requirement and plain language interpretation of Section 553 represents a firm adherence to the strict and literal application of the Bankruptcy Code. It pays homage to the weight of authority cautioning against enlarging the right to setoff beyond that allowed in the Code. 28 And in holding that no exception to the mutual debt requirement in Section 553 can be created by a private agreement, the court underscored 347

8 Pratt s Journal of Bankruptcy Law the view that setoff is fundamentally at odds with the Bankruptcy Code s priority scheme. Recognizing any setoff exception based on the facts and arguments presented would have elevated Chevron s status as an unsecured creditor to that of a secured creditor, allowing it full recovery on its claim. This result, the court found, would remain in conflict with the basic principles of equal distribution for all similarly situated creditors. After the SemCrude dust settles, it may be that some contract parties benefit from the unpaid guarantee scenario or the Bankruptcy Code s safe harbor provisions, thereby mitigating SemCrude s impact. Of course, the safe harbor protections on any set of facts are never guaranteed. In the master netting agreement context where the same parties net multiple financial products, the safe harbor protections and the force of the 2005 Amendments may apply. But in the cross-affiliate netting context, it s not clear that they would apply. One thing remains clear after SemCrude: contract parties should not rely on a negotiated cross-affiliate setoff the triangle is no longer as sturdy as it may have once seemed. NOTES 1 In re SemCrude, L.P. et al., No (BLS), 2009 WL (Bankr. D. Del. Jan. 9, 2009) (hereinafter, SemCrude ). 2 On January 20, 2009, Chevron filed a motion for reconsideration (the Reconsideration Motion ). In the Reconsideration Motion, Chevron argued that the agreements at issue were safe harbor contracts not subject to the mutuality requirements of Section 553. According to Chevron, the agreements were either forward contracts or swap agreements, and that, in either case, mutuality is no longer relevant. In an order dated March 19, 2009, the Reconsideration Motion was denied. On March 26, 2009, Chevron filed a Notice of Appeal of both the initial decision denying Chevron s motion for relief from the automatic stay as well as the March 19, 2009 order U.S.C. 553(a). 4 In re Steines, 285 B.R. 360, 362 (Bankr. D. N.J. 2002). 5 See 11 U.S.C. 506(a). 6 See SemCrude, 2009 WL 68873, *6 ( The overwhelming majority of courts to consider the issue have held that debts are mutual only if they are due to 348

9 SemCrude, Setoff, and the Collapsing Triangle and from the same persons in the same capacity. )(citations omitted). 7 See id., [3][b] at (15th ed. rev. 2009). 8 Craig R. Enochs, Fundi A. Mwamba, and Paul E. Vrana, Early Termination and Liquidation Provisions As Risk Tools In Master Energy Agreements at 12 (2004), 9 Id. 10 SemCrude, 2009 WL 68873, *1-*2. 11 Id. at *2. 12 Id. at *4. 13 Id. (emphasis added). 14 Id. at *5. 15 Id. at *7. 16 Id. at *6 (citations omitted). 17 Id. at *8. 18 Id. 19 Id. at n. 7 ( This is not to say that setoff would necessarily be appropriate against SemCrude if it were a guarantor of SemStream or SemFuel s debt, however. ) (noting split of authority on issue)(citations omitted). 20 Id. at *6. 21 See id. at n.7 (citing In re Ingersoll, 90 B.R. 168 (Bankr. W.D.N.C. 1987) and Bloor v. Shapiro, 32 B.R. 993 (S.D.N.Y. 1983). 22 See 11 U.S.C. 553(b)(1). 23 Sections 362(b)(6) and 362(b)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code specifically provide an exception to the automatic stay for the exercise of certain contractual rights by certain non-debtor counterparties to a commodity contract, forward contract or securities contract, and repurchase agreement. See also 11 U.S.C. 559 (addressing contractual rights of repo participants and ipso facto clauses); 11 U.S.C. 555 addressing contractual rights of certain parties to a securities contract and ipso facto clauses); 11 U.S.C. 556 (addressing contractual rights of certain parties to a commodities contract or forward contract and ipso facto clauses). 24 See 11 U.S.C. 553(b)(1). 25 See Mot. for Recon See SemCrude Mem. Order at 6-7 (March 19, 2009). 27 SemCrude, 2009 WL 68873, *10, *14]. 28 Id. at 22 (citations omitted) 349

Delaware Bankruptcy Court Applies Safe "Safe Harbor Harbor" Protections to Repurchase Agreement; Article 9

Delaware Bankruptcy Court Applies Safe Safe Harbor Harbor Protections to Repurchase Agreement; Article 9 M 0 R R I S 0 N I FOERSTER Legal Updates & News Bulletins Delaware Bankruptcy Court Applies "Safe Safe Harbor" Harbor Protections to Repurchase Agreement; Article 9 Deemed Inapplicable July 2008 by Norman

More information

DCF 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. 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 information

NATIONAL BANKRUPTCY CONFERENCE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE CAPITAL MARKETS AND THE UCC. March 2, 2009

NATIONAL BANKRUPTCY CONFERENCE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE CAPITAL MARKETS AND THE UCC. March 2, 2009 NATIONAL BANKRUPTCY CONFERENCE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE CAPITAL MARKETS AND THE UCC March 2, 2009 The Committee on the Capital Markets and the UCC (the Committee ) makes this report to the National

More information

Second Circuit to Lenders: Get Your UCC Filings Right

Second Circuit to Lenders: Get Your UCC Filings Right February 5, 2015 Second Circuit to Lenders: Get Your UCC Filings Right By Geoffrey R. Peck and Jordan A. Wishnew 1 INTRODUCTION On January 21, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued

More information

Derivatives Provisions of the 2005 Bankruptcy Amendments

Derivatives Provisions of the 2005 Bankruptcy Amendments Derivatives Provisions of the 2005 Bankruptcy Amendments APRIL 22, 2005 Introduction The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (the Act ) 1 is a sweeping overhaul of many provisions

More information

MAKE-WHOLE CLAIMS AND BANKRUPTCY POLICY

MAKE-WHOLE CLAIMS AND BANKRUPTCY POLICY MAKE-WHOLE CLAIMS AND BANKRUPTCY POLICY Douglas P. Bartner and Robert A. Britton* Loan agreements and bond indentures frequently contain make-whole or yield maintenance provisions that are designed to

More information

Cash Collateral Orders Revisited Following ResCap

Cash 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 information

AkerAlert. The American Home Mortgage Case and Repurchase Agreements. Finance Law ADVERTISEMENT. march 21, 2008

AkerAlert. The American Home Mortgage Case and Repurchase Agreements. Finance Law ADVERTISEMENT. march 21, 2008 AkerAlert Finance Law march 21, 2008 The American Home Mortgage Case and Repurchase Agreements By Jules Cohen, Esq. and Milton Vescovacci, Esq. In the field of mortgage warehouse lending, repurchase agreements

More information

How To Negotiate A Ch. 11 Plan Support Agreement

How To Negotiate A Ch. 11 Plan Support Agreement 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 How To Negotiate A Ch. 11 Plan Support Agreement Law360,

More information

ENTERED TAWANA C. MARSHALL, CLERK THE DATE OF ENTRY IS ON THE COURT'S DOCKET

ENTERED TAWANA C. MARSHALL, CLERK THE DATE OF ENTRY IS ON THE COURT'S DOCKET Case 14-42974-rfn13 Doc 45 Filed 01/08/15 Entered 01/08/15 15:22:05 Page 1 of 12 U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS ENTERED TAWANA C. MARSHALL, CLERK THE DATE OF ENTRY IS ON THE COURT'S DOCKET

More information

No Premium Recovery Guarantees For 5th Circ. Lenders

No Premium Recovery Guarantees For 5th Circ. Lenders 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 No Premium Recovery Guarantees For 5th Circ.

More information

Gifting & The Absolute Priority Rule. Brianna Walsh, J.D. Candidate 2016

Gifting & The Absolute Priority Rule. Brianna Walsh, J.D. Candidate 2016 Gifting & The Absolute Priority Rule 2015 Volume VII No. 29 Gifting & The Absolute Priority Rule Brianna Walsh, J.D. Candidate 2016 Cite as: Gifting & The Absolute Priority Rule, 7 ST. JOHN S BANKR. RESEARCH

More information

The Effect Of Philly News On Credit Bidding

The Effect Of Philly News On Credit Bidding Portfolio Media, Inc. 860 Broadway, 6 th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 reprints@portfoliomedia.com The Effect Of Philly News On Credit Bidding Law360, New York (July 08,

More information

RECENT TRENDS IN ENFORCEMENT OF INTERCREDITOR AGREEMENTS AND AGREEMENTS AMONG LENDERS IN BANKRUPTCY 1

RECENT TRENDS IN ENFORCEMENT OF INTERCREDITOR AGREEMENTS AND AGREEMENTS AMONG LENDERS IN BANKRUPTCY 1 RECENT TRENDS IN ENFORCEMENT OF INTERCREDITOR AGREEMENTS AND AGREEMENTS AMONG LENDERS IN BANKRUPTCY 1 Over the last several decades, the enforcement of intercreditor agreements ("ICAs") that purport to

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN 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 information

Chapter VI. Credit Bidding s Impact on Professional Fees

Chapter VI. Credit Bidding s Impact on Professional Fees Chapter VI Credit Bidding s Impact on Professional Fees American Bankruptcy Institute A. Should the Amount of the Credit Bid Be Included as Consideration Upon Which a Professional s Fee Is Calculated?

More information

mg Doc 3836 Filed 05/28/13 Entered 05/28/13 10:24:28 Main Document Pg 1 of 11

mg Doc 3836 Filed 05/28/13 Entered 05/28/13 10:24:28 Main Document Pg 1 of 11 Pg 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------X In re: RESIDENTIAL CAPITAL, LLC, et al. Case No. 12-12020 (MG) Chapter 11 Debtors. ----------------------------------------X

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re: MARK RICHARD LIPPOLD, Debtor. 1 FOR PUBLICATION Chapter 7 Case No. 11-12300 (MG) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF

More information

Alert. 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 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 information

Survey of the Legal Landscape Applicable to Master Netting Agreements

Survey of the Legal Landscape Applicable to Master Netting Agreements Survey of the Legal Landscape Applicable to Master Netting Agreements October 2002 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED UNDER U.S. AND FOREIGN LAW, TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS. AUTOMATIC LICENSE PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT

More information

Case Document 290 Filed in TXSB on 02/17/16 Page 1 of 8

Case Document 290 Filed in TXSB on 02/17/16 Page 1 of 8 Case 16-20012 Document 290 Filed in TXSB on 02/17/16 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION IN RE: SHERWIN ALUMINA COMPANY, LLC et

More information

Ride Through Option for Real Property Survived BAPCPA

Ride Through Option for Real Property Survived BAPCPA Ride Through Option for Real Property Survived BAPCPA James Lynch, J.D. Candidate 2010 The Bankruptcy Abuse Protection Act of 2005 ( BAPCPA ) largely eliminated the socalled ride through option for security

More information

United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel For the Eighth Circuit

United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel For the Eighth Circuit United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel For the Eighth Circuit No. 13-6023 In re: Wilma M. Pennington-Thurman llllllllllllllllllllldebtor ------------------------------ Wilma M. Pennington-Thurman llllllllllllllllllllldebtor

More information

EXPANDING FOREIGN CREDITORS TOOLKIT: THE PRESUMPTION AGAINST EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION

EXPANDING 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 information

mg Doc 5285 Filed 10/04/13 Entered 10/04/13 16:34:28 Main Document Pg 1 of 7

mg Doc 5285 Filed 10/04/13 Entered 10/04/13 16:34:28 Main Document Pg 1 of 7 Pg 1 of 7 STORCH AMINI & MUNVES PC 2 Grand Central Tower, 25 th Floor 140 East 45 th Street New York, New York 10017 Tel. (212 490-4100 Noam M. Besdin, Esq. nbesdin@samlegal.com Counsel for Simona Robinson

More information

Litigation Trustees Not Allowed to Wear Their Non-Bankruptcy Hats to Avoid Swap Transactions as Fraudulent Conveyances

Litigation 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 information

IUE-CWA v. Visteon Corp. Solidifying the Third Circuit s Strict Constructionist Approach to Statutory Interpretation

IUE-CWA v. Visteon Corp. Solidifying the Third Circuit s Strict Constructionist Approach to Statutory Interpretation BANKRUPTCY & REORGANIZATION CLIENT PUBLICATION August 10, 2010... IUE-CWA v. Visteon Corp. Solidifying the Third Circuit s Strict Constructionist Approach to Statutory Interpretation A Victory for Retirees

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND (Greenbelt Division)

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND (Greenbelt Division) IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND (Greenbelt Division In re: USGen New England, Inc., Case No. 03-30465 (PM Debtor. Chapter 11 MOTION FOR AUTHORITY TO REJECT POWER PURCHASE

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION IN RE: JAMES WESLEY GRADY, III JOCELYN VANIESA GRADY Debtors. CASE NO. 06-60726CRM CHAPTER 13 JUDGE MULLINS ORDER THIS MATTER

More information

Overview and Analysis of Select Provisions of the ABI Chapter 11 Reform Commission Final Report and Recommendations

Overview and Analysis of Select Provisions of the ABI Chapter 11 Reform Commission Final Report and Recommendations Overview and Analysis of Select Provisions of the ABI Chapter 11 Reform Commission Final Report and Recommendations Part Two of Three By Orrick Restructuring Group Table of Contents Last month, Orrick

More information

The Pervasive Problem Of Numerosity

The Pervasive Problem Of Numerosity Portfolio Media, Inc. 860 Broadway, 6 th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@portfoliomedia.com The Pervasive Problem Of Numerosity Law360,

More information

From the Bankruptcy Courts: Release of Standby Letter of Credit as a Defense to a Preference Action

From the Bankruptcy Courts: Release of Standby Letter of Credit as a Defense to a Preference Action Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law Hofstra Law Faculty Scholarship 1988 From the Bankruptcy Courts: Release of Standby Letter of Credit as a Defense to

More information

In re Luedtke, Case No svk (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 7/31/2008) (Bankr. E.D. Wis., 2008)

In re Luedtke, Case No svk (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 7/31/2008) (Bankr. E.D. Wis., 2008) Page 1 In re: Dawn L. Luedtke, Chapter 13, Debtor. Case No. 02-35082-svk. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin. July 31, 2008. MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER SUSAN KELLEY, Bankruptcy Judge. Dawn

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OF OPINION 1

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OF OPINION 1 The court incorporates by reference in this paragraph and adopts as the findings and orders of this court the document set forth below. This document was signed electronically on April 02, 2007, which

More information

Intercreditor Agreements After Momentive: When a Hindrance Is Not a Hindrance

Intercreditor 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 information

Case MFW Doc 3394 Filed 02/01/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case MFW Doc 3394 Filed 02/01/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Case 16-10527-MFW Doc 3394 Filed 02/01/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: TSAWD Holdings, Inc., et al., 1 Debtors. Chapter 11 Case No. 16-10527 (MFW)

More information

Presentation will focus on three major topic areas:

Presentation will focus on three major topic areas: Presentation will focus on three major topic areas: Secured Creditors and Vehicles What actions can a secured creditor take upon the debtor s stated intention to surrender the vehicle? For what actions

More information

Presentation will focus on three major topic areas:

Presentation will focus on three major topic areas: 1 Presentation will focus on three major topic areas: Secured Creditors and Vehicles What actions can a secured creditor take upon the debtor s stated intention to surrender the vehicle? For what actions

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2008 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 11-13-2008 Ward v. Avaya Inc Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 07-3246 Follow this and additional

More information

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT. Plaintiff Board of Education of the City of Chicago (the School Board ), by and through

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT. Plaintiff Board of Education of the City of Chicago (the School Board ), by and through Jeff J. Friedman Merritt A. Pardini KATTEN MUCHIN ROSENMAN LLP 575 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10022-2585 Telephone: (212) 940-8800 Facsimile: (212) 940-8776 Attorneys for the Board of Education

More information

Cutting Edge Issues in Bankruptcy

Cutting Edge Issues in Bankruptcy Cutting Edge Issues in Bankruptcy by Mark C. Ellenberg Southeastern Bankruptcy Law Institute March 19, 2010 I. Derivatives Issues in Lehman The bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. ( LBHI ) has

More information

An Ounce of Prevention is Worth a Pound of Cure: How to Deal with Bankruptcy in Contracts

An Ounce of Prevention is Worth a Pound of Cure: How to Deal with Bankruptcy in Contracts An Ounce of Prevention is Worth a Pound of Cure: How to Deal with Bankruptcy in Contracts Joshua A. Lefkowitz, Ares Management, Legal Department Michael L. Bernstein, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP Advanced

More information

THE BASICS OF CASH COLLATERAL AND DIP FINANCING by Kevin M. Lippman and Jonathan L. Howell

THE BASICS OF CASH COLLATERAL AND DIP FINANCING by Kevin M. Lippman and Jonathan L. Howell I. Generally A. Importance THE BASICS OF CASH COLLATERAL AND DIP FINANCING by Kevin M. Lippman and Jonathan L. Howell In most Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases, a debtor 1 will need to use cash that is subject

More information

Case reb Document 39 Filed 03/03/2008 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION

Case reb Document 39 Filed 03/03/2008 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION Case 08-20355-reb Document 39 Filed 03/03/2008 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION In re: ) Chapter 11 ) CORNERSTONE MINISTRIES ) Case No. 08-20355-reb

More information

Rising Rates For Real Estate: Interest Rate Hedge Agreements Can Help

Rising Rates For Real Estate: Interest Rate Hedge Agreements Can Help Property October, 2005 Reprinted with permission from the October 2005 issue of Real Estate Finance. Rising Rates For Real Estate: Interest Rate Hedge Agreements Can Help By: Malcolm K. Montgomery The

More information

to bid their secured debt at the auction.

to bid their secured debt at the auction. Seventh Circuit Disagrees With Philadelphia Newspapers And Finds That Credit Bidding Required For Asset Sales In Bankruptcy Plans By Josef Athanas, Caroline Reckler, Matthew Warren and Andrew Mellen the

More information

Case reg Doc 1076 Filed 04/27/18 Entered 04/27/18 15:10:04

Case reg Doc 1076 Filed 04/27/18 Entered 04/27/18 15:10:04 ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP 485 Madison Avenue, 10 th Floor New York, New York 10022 Telephone: (212) 704-9600 Facsimile: (917) 261-5864 Shawn P. Naunton Attorneys for Ira Machowsky KRAUSS PLLC 41 Madison Avenue,

More information

Netting for Capital Purposes: The Need for Netting Opinions

Netting for Capital Purposes: The Need for Netting Opinions Conference on Netting of OTC Financial Contracts in Latin America and the Caribbean Netting for Capital Purposes: The Need for Netting Opinions Marjorie E. Gross Senior Vice President & Associate General

More information

Bankruptcy Court Recognizes the Doctrine of Reverse Preemption

Bankruptcy Court Recognizes the Doctrine of Reverse Preemption Bankruptcy Court Recognizes the Doctrine of Reverse Preemption Written by: Gilbert L. Hamberg Gilbert L. Hamberg, Esq.; Yardley, Pa. Ghamberg@verizon.net In In re Medical Care Management Co., 361 B.R.

More information

alg 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

alg 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 information

Determining When Projected Disposable Income Test May Be a Basis for a Post- Confirmation Modification. Steven Ching, J.D.

Determining When Projected Disposable Income Test May Be a Basis for a Post- Confirmation Modification. Steven Ching, J.D. 2014 Volume VI No. 6 Determining When Projected Disposable Income Test May Be a Basis for a Post- Confirmation Modification Steven Ching, J.D. Candidate 2015 Cite as: Determining When Projected Disposable

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re Electra D. Rice-Etherly, Case No. 01-60533 Debtor. Chapter 13 Hon. Marci B. McIvor / Electra D. Rice-Etherly, Plaintiff,

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION --------------------------------------------------------------x In re Chapter 9 CITY OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN, Case No. 13-53846

More information

Reclamation Rights in Bankruptcy What Every Credit Manager Needs to Know By: Schuyler G. Carroll, Esq. & George Angelich, Esq.

Reclamation Rights in Bankruptcy What Every Credit Manager Needs to Know By: Schuyler G. Carroll, Esq. & George Angelich, Esq. Reclamation Rights in Bankruptcy What Every Credit Manager Needs to Know By: Schuyler G. Carroll, Esq. & George Angelich, Esq. Abstract Vendors of goods regularly extend business credit to customers. However,

More information

Case BLS Doc 97 Filed 08/08/18 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE.

Case BLS Doc 97 Filed 08/08/18 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. Case 18-11780-BLS Doc 97 Filed 08/08/18 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: BROOKSTONE HOLDINGS CORP., et al., 1 Debtors. Chapter 11 Case No. 18-11780

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 06-1719 IN RE: ABC-NACO, INC., and Debtor-Appellee, OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED CREDITORS OF ABC-NACO, INC., APPEAL OF: Appellee. SOFTMART,

More information

Delaware Bankruptcy Court Creates Vendor-Friendly Forum by Preserving Reclamation Rights in the Face of DIP Lenders Liens

Delaware Bankruptcy Court Creates Vendor-Friendly Forum by Preserving Reclamation Rights in the Face of DIP Lenders Liens Delaware Bankruptcy Court Creates Vendor-Friendly Forum by Preserving Reclamation Rights in the Face of DIP Lenders Liens 2017 Volume IX No. 12 Delaware Bankruptcy Court Creates Vendor-Friendly Forum by

More information

Investors rights When a fund or its general partner Goes

Investors rights When a fund or its general partner Goes 2009 FALL FEATURE Investors rights When a fund or its general partner Goes bankrupt 48 PREA Quarterly, Fall 2009 I n today s tumultuous economic environment, what was once unexpected the bankruptcy of

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS WESTERN DIVISION In re: Chapter 7 THOMAS J. FLANNERY, Case No. 12-31023-HJB HOLLIE L. FLANNERY, Debtors JOSEPH B. COLLINS, CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE, Adversary

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE Dated: 10/01/09 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE In Re: ) ELLIOT and DEBORAH RAMSEY ) CASE NO. 309-06086 Debtors. ) Chapter 13 ) Judge Marian F. Harrison ) MEMORANDUM

More information

Case BLS Doc 131 Filed 12/08/17 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case BLS Doc 131 Filed 12/08/17 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Case 17-12377-BLS Doc 131 Filed 12/08/17 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE x In re Chapter 11 ExGen Texas Power, LLC, et al., 1 Case No. 17-12377 (BLS) Debtors.

More information

rk Doc 14 FILED 08/07/17 ENTERED 08/07/17 10:27:14 Page 1 of 12

rk Doc 14 FILED 08/07/17 ENTERED 08/07/17 10:27:14 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION, CANTON ----------------------------------------------------------x In re Case No. 17-61735 SCI DIRECT, LLC Chapter 11 Debtor and

More information

Case GLT Doc 577 Filed 06/23/17 Entered 06/23/17 14:22:20 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 8

Case GLT Doc 577 Filed 06/23/17 Entered 06/23/17 14:22:20 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 8 Document Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA In re: Case No. 17-22045 (GLT rue21, inc., et al., 1 Chapter 11 Debtors. (Jointly Administered Hearing

More information

Draw on Letter of Credit Not Limited by Cap on Landlord Claims. March/April Nicholas M. Miller and Joshua P. Weisser

Draw on Letter of Credit Not Limited by Cap on Landlord Claims. March/April Nicholas M. Miller and Joshua P. Weisser Draw on Letter of Credit Not Limited by Cap on Landlord Claims March/April 2006 Nicholas M. Miller and Joshua P. Weisser Parties to commercial transactions routinely employ letters of credit as a means

More information

And the Hogs Just Get Fatter Can They Be Put on a Diet?

And the Hogs Just Get Fatter Can They Be Put on a Diet? 31 st Annual National CLE Conference Vail, Colorado, January 8-12, 2014 And the Hogs Just Get Fatter Can They Be Put on a Diet? Make Whole Premiums and Other Lender Fees, Default Interest and Penalties

More information

MEMORANDUM. Chairman John S.R. Issues Relating to Use of Repurchase Agreements by Mutual Funds. This memorandum presents a preliminary legal analysis

MEMORANDUM. Chairman John S.R. Issues Relating to Use of Repurchase Agreements by Mutual Funds. This memorandum presents a preliminary legal analysis i L~ MEMORANDUM TO- FROM : RE : Chairman John S.R Green,~~ Edward F. General Counsel Lad Issues Relating to Use of Repurchase Agreements by Mutual Funds September 3, 1982 I. Introduction This memorandum

More information

Case BLS Doc 131 Filed 05/24/18 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE.

Case BLS Doc 131 Filed 05/24/18 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. Case 18-11092-BLS Doc 131 Filed 05/24/18 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: RMH FRANCHISE HOLDINGS, INC., et al., 1 Debtors. Chapter 11 Case No. 18-11092

More information

Case BLS Doc 397 Filed 03/18/13 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. ) Related to Docket No.

Case BLS Doc 397 Filed 03/18/13 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. ) Related to Docket No. Case 12-13262-BLS Doc 397 Filed 03/18/13 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: ) Chapter 11 REVSTONE INDUSTRIES, LLC, et al, 1 ) Case No. 12-13262 (BLS)

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI IN RE: ) ) NATHAN L. OSBORN and ) Case No. 06-41015 CATHERINE C. OSBORN, ) ) Debtors. ) ORDER SUSTAINING DEBTORS OBJECTION TO

More information

Case Document 40 Filed in TXSB on 06/08/09 Page 1 of 11

Case Document 40 Filed in TXSB on 06/08/09 Page 1 of 11 Case 07-38246 Document 40 Filed in TXSB on 06/08/09 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IN RE: Case No. 07-38246 DAVID ORLANDO COLLINS,

More information

MAJOR INSOLVENCY REFORM: GETTING THE (IPSO) FACTOS STRAIGHT

MAJOR INSOLVENCY REFORM: GETTING THE (IPSO) FACTOS STRAIGHT MAJOR INSOLVENCY REFORM: GETTING THE (IPSO) FACTOS STRAIGHT 19 May 2016 Australia Legal Briefings By Paul Apáthy, Rowena White and James Myint IN BRIEF In its Improving Bankruptcy and Insolvency Laws Proposal

More information

Case CSS Doc 119 Filed 09/25/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case CSS Doc 119 Filed 09/25/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Case 15-11934-CSS Doc 119 Filed 09/25/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) In re: ) Chapter 11 ) SAMSON RESOURCES CORPORATION, et al., 1 ) Case No. 15-11934

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No Case: 14-1628 Document: 003112320132 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/08/2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 14-1628 FREEDOM MEDICAL SUPPLY INC, Individually and On Behalf of All Others

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY SOUTHERN DIVISION PIKEVILLE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) *** *** *** ***

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY SOUTHERN DIVISION PIKEVILLE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) *** *** *** *** Case: 7:15-cv-00096-ART Doc #: 56 Filed: 02/05/16 Page: 1 of 11 - Page ID#: 2240 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY SOUTHERN DIVISION PIKEVILLE In re BLACK DIAMOND MINING COMPANY,

More information

Fifth Circuit Decision May Reignite Debate On Artificial Impairment In Engineering A Cramdown Plan Of Reorganization

Fifth Circuit Decision May Reignite Debate On Artificial Impairment In Engineering A Cramdown Plan Of Reorganization March 2013 Fifth Circuit Decision May Reignite Debate On Artificial Impairment In Engineering A Cramdown Plan Of Reorganization Introduction Imagine this scenario: A real estate holding company in chapter

More information

Case bjh11 Doc 307 Filed 01/10/19 Entered 01/10/19 16:32:52 Page 1 of 7

Case bjh11 Doc 307 Filed 01/10/19 Entered 01/10/19 16:32:52 Page 1 of 7 Case 18-33967-bjh11 Doc 307 Filed 01/10/19 Entered 01/10/19 16:32:52 Page 1 of 7 Kevin M. Lippman Texas Bar No. 00784479 Deborah M. Perry Texas Bar No. 24002755 MUNSCH HARDT KOPF & HARR, P.C. 500 N. Akard

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN 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 : A123 SYSTEMS, INC., et al., : Case No. 12-12859 (KJC) : Debtors. 1 : Hearing Date: 11/8/12 at 10:00 a.m. : Objection

More information

DISTRESSED DEBT REPORT

DISTRESSED DEBT REPORT DISTRESSED DEBT REPORT Fall 2011 A Publication of the Distressed Debt Group COURT STRICTLY INTERPRETS WHAT CONSTITUTES THE IMPAIRMENT OF ASSIGNED CLAIM UNDER A CLAIM ASSIGNMENT AGREEMENT The District Court

More information

In Re: Downey Financial Corp

In Re: Downey Financial Corp 2015 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1-26-2015 In Re: Downey Financial Corp Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2015

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ------------------------------------------------------------------- x : Chapter 11 In re: : : Case No. 12-13998 (MFW) THQ, INC., et al.,

More information

Case Document 153 Filed in TXSB on 03/24/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Case Document 153 Filed in TXSB on 03/24/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION Case 15-31086 Document 153 Filed in TXSB on 03/24/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IN RE: UNIVERSITY GENERAL HEALTH CASE NO. 15-31086 SYSTEM, INC.,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. Appellant, Appellee,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. Appellant, Appellee, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ACORN CAPITAL GROUP, LLC, v. Appellant, Case No. 09-cv-00996-JMR Judge James M. Rosenbaum UNITED STATES TRUSTEE, Appellee, POLAROID CORPORATION,

More information

FINAL APPLICATION FOR COMPENSATION AND FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES OF THE OFFICIAL UNSECURED CREDITORS COMMITTEE OF WARNACO GROUP, INC. ET AL.

FINAL APPLICATION FOR COMPENSATION AND FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES OF THE OFFICIAL UNSECURED CREDITORS COMMITTEE OF WARNACO GROUP, INC. ET AL. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X : Chapter 11 In Re: : Warnaco Group, Inc. et al., : Case Nos. 01-41643

More information

BANKRUPTCY ISSUES IN INTERCREDITOR AGREEMENTS. Jeffrey A. Marks SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P.

BANKRUPTCY ISSUES IN INTERCREDITOR AGREEMENTS. Jeffrey A. Marks SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. BANKRUPTCY ISSUES IN INTERCREDITOR AGREEMENTS Jeffrey A. Marks SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. jemarks@ssd.com Introduction This article addresses bankruptcy issues commonly arising in connection with

More information

Case KKS Doc 174 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION

Case KKS Doc 174 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION Case 12-31658-KKS Doc 174 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION IN RE: KEN D. BLACKBURN, Case No. 12-31658-KKS LAUREN A. BLACKBURN,

More information

Case CSS Doc 16 Filed 08/26/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case CSS Doc 16 Filed 08/26/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Case 14-11987-CSS Doc 16 Filed 08/26/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: FCC Holdings, Inc., et al., 1 Debtors. Chapter 11 Case No. 14-11987 (CSS) (Joint

More information

Derivatives Treatment in Bankruptcy Proceedings

Derivatives Treatment in Bankruptcy Proceedings presents Derivatives Treatment in Bankruptcy Proceedings Minimizing Risks When a Counterparty Becomes Insolvent A Live 90-Minute Audio Conference with Interactive Q&A Today's panel features: Joel S. Telpner,

More information

CALPERS MAY PREVAIL DESPITE BANKRUPTCY JUDGE S WARNING

CALPERS MAY PREVAIL DESPITE BANKRUPTCY JUDGE S WARNING CALPERS MAY PREVAIL DESPITE BANKRUPTCY JUDGE S WARNING IN CITY OF STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA THAT FAILURE TO IMPAIR PUBLIC PENSION OBLIGATIONS MAY CONSTITUTE UNFAIR DISCRIMINATION IN PLAN OF ADJUSTMENT Timothy

More information

Case Study: In Re Visteon Corp.

Case 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 information

Case , Document 87-1, 03/11/2015, , Page1 of 10. (Argued: September 29, 2014 Decided: March 11, 2015)

Case , Document 87-1, 03/11/2015, , Page1 of 10. (Argued: September 29, 2014 Decided: March 11, 2015) Case -0, Document -, 0//0, 0, Page of 0-0-ag Stryker v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 0 0 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 0 (Argued: September, 0 Decided: March,

More information

Business Bankruptcy and Creditors Rights Issues

Business 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 information

Case MFW Doc Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 of 10

Case MFW Doc Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 of 10 Case 08-12229-MFW Doc 12352 Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ---------------------------------------------------------------x : In re: : Chapter

More information

Controversy ensued when Delta filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in September 2005.

Controversy ensued when Delta filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in September 2005. Aviation - USA Applicability of Tax Indemnification Agreements after Chapter 11 Reorganization Contributed by Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP September 10 2008 Introduction Facts Decision Implications Introduction

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT IN AND FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT IN AND FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION Case 09-11191-PGH Doc 428 Filed 04/01/09 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT IN AND FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION IN RE: MERCEDES HOMES, INC., et. al., Debtors.

More information

Case cjf Doc 35 Filed 03/30/18 Entered 03/30/18 13:46:32 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 11

Case cjf Doc 35 Filed 03/30/18 Entered 03/30/18 13:46:32 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 11 Document Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN In re: Case No.: 17-14180-13 VICTORIA SUE FISHEL, Debtor. MEMORANDUM DECISION Victoria Sue Fishel ( Debtor ) is a consumer

More information

No Surcharge for You: Third Circuit Rules That Section 506(c) Surcharge Is "Sharply Limited" January/February Lauren M. Buonome Mark G.

No Surcharge for You: Third Circuit Rules That Section 506(c) Surcharge Is Sharply Limited January/February Lauren M. Buonome Mark G. No Surcharge for You: Third Circuit Rules That Section 506(c) Surcharge Is "Sharply Limited" January/February 2014 Lauren M. Buonome Mark G. Douglas The ability to "surcharge" a secured creditor's collateral

More information

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation s Termination Premiums Constitute Dischargeable Pre-Petition Contingent Claims

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation s Termination Premiums Constitute Dischargeable Pre-Petition Contingent Claims Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation s Termination Premiums Constitute Dischargeable Pre-Petition Contingent Claims Thomas Rooney, J.D. Candidate 2010 A. Introduction In Oneida Ltd. v. Pension Benefit

More information

KIRKLAND. Essar Steel Algoma: Restructuring Under the Canada Business Corporations Act and Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code

KIRKLAND. Essar Steel Algoma: Restructuring Under the Canada Business Corporations Act and Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code KIRKLAND January 2015 Essar Steel Algoma: Restructuring Under the Canada Business Corporations Act and Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code Just as companies increasingly use the Bankruptcy Code to implement

More information

Signed January 17, 2019 United States Bankruptcy Judge

Signed January 17, 2019 United States Bankruptcy Judge Case 18-50214-rlj11 Doc 865 Filed 01/17/19 Entered 01/17/19 16:51:55 Page 1 of 7 The following constitutes the ruling of the court and has the force and effect therein described. Signed January 17, 2019

More information

Case AJC Doc 10 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 7. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Miami Division

Case AJC Doc 10 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 7. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Miami Division Case 13-13954-AJC Doc 10 Filed 02/26/13 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Miami Division www.flsb.uscourts.gov In re: BANAH INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC. Case No. 13-13954-AJC

More information