Breaking from the overwhelming majority of prior case law, two bankruptcy courts recently held that Medicare and Medicaid provider agreements can be assigned as part of a Section 363 bankruptcy sale free and clear of the assignor’s liabilities under the provider agreements.

The President signed legislation on August 23, 2019 modifying the Bankruptcy Code in several respects. Here are the four biggest takeaways.

Help for the preference recipient

Almost all businesses have either received a letter from a bankruptcy trustee or have been sued by the trustee for the repayment of sums they received from their customer within 90 days of the customer’s bankruptcy filing. The recipient has several affirmative defenses to return of these so-called “preference” payments that may reduce, or even eliminate, the amount that must be repaid.

Click here to watch the video.

Webinar

Join Energy and Bankruptcy Law professionals from Thompson Coburn LLP for a one-hour webinar as they address recent developments in the Chapter 11 bankruptcies of PG&E, First Energy and other related cases highlighting the emerging clash between federal energy law and federal bankruptcy law.

In a recent opinion, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled the City of Chicago must return repossessed and impounded vehicles upon receiving a bankruptcy petition, or run the risk of violating the automatic stay under Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code.

Background

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the standard for holding a creditor in contempt for attempts to collect a debt from someone who previously received a bankruptcy discharge. In Taggart v. Lorenzen, Executor of the Estate of Brown, et al., 587 U.S. ____ (2019), the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and held that the proper standard to apply to bankruptcy discharge violations was an objective standard.

On May 20, 2019, the U.S. Supreme ruled a trademark licensee can continue to use the trademark after a bankrupt licensor rejects the license agreement. The case is Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC. Some lower courts had ruled that rejection of trademark license agreement terminated the licensee’s rights to use the trademark.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit allowed a secured creditor to retain its lien and therefore the proceeds from a sale, even after the secured creditor mistakenly released its mortgage lien. The case is Trinity 83 Development, LLC v. ColFin Midwest Funding, LLC (In re Trinity Development, LLC), slip. op. (7th Cir. March 1, 2019).

It is an understatement to say that questionable collateral descriptions in Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”) financing statements have spawned much litigation over many years. The drafters of the UCC have refined the law of secured transactions in attempt to provide clear guidance to lenders and borrowers on the correct manner to describe collateral in a financing statement. To be blunt, it does not take a great deal of skill or legal acumen to correctly prepare a financing statement, particularly with respect to providing a legally sufficient collateral description.

In a case with far reaching implications for equipment lessors, the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York in the Republic Airways bankruptcy case has held that a liquidated damages provision in a lease that requires the lessee to pay the lessor for a decline in the market value of equipment upon the lessee’s default is unenforceable.

In the recent Chicago bankruptcy case In re Gouletas, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Timothy A. Barnes ruled that obligations are not extinguished by statutes of limitation and, even after the expiration of the limitation period, a creditor retains its rights in collateral so long as the underlying debt is enforceable.

Background