In earlier posts, we discussed rulings by two bankruptcy courts, one in Delaware and one in Virginia, in which the potential chilling e

Once might be considered an aberration. Is twice the new normal?

Bankruptcy court denizens, especially buyers of secured debt at a discount, were jolted by the recent Delaware Bankruptcy Court decision in In re Fisker Automotive Holdings, Inc. In that decision, the court capped at $25 million the amount a secured creditor was permitted to credit bid its $168 million claim at a bankruptcy Section 363 sale. The $25 million credit bid cap correlated to the amount the secured creditor paid for the debt. While Section 363(k) of the Bankruptcy Code permits a bankruptcy court to limit credit bidding “for cause,” the concerns he

Based on progress to date, a Model Act on Appointment and Powers of Real Estate Receivers may be making its way to a state legislature near you within the next couple of years.  The Committee appointed by and representing the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws to prepare the model act met again in late September, 2013, to review the latest working draft of the

Earlier this year we reported on a Michigan trial court opinion, issued by Judge Edward R. Post of the Ottawa County Circuit Court in First Financial Bank, N.A. v. Scott T. Bosgraaf, et al., Case No. 11-02488 (click here to read), concluding that a court-appointed receiver has the power to sell mortgaged commercial real property free and clear of statutory mortgage foreclosure redemption rights.

Earlier this month, we reported to you on the bipartisan legislation introduced in the Michigan Legislature known as the Nonrecourse Mortgage Loan Act (the “Act”).  

The Act has been approved overwhelmingly by both chambers of the Michigan Legislature and will be presented to the Governor’s office for signature. It is expected that the legislation will be signed into law within the next several business days.  

A bankruptcy case^[1] (no surprise) has produced another instructive court ruling on post-acceleration enforceability of a prepayment (make-whole) premium provision contained in a debt instrument. This latest lesson comes via the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, affirming a ruling of that district’s U.S.