Two recent decisions involving health care companies demonstrate how reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code1 can be used to manage large liabilities.
Bankruptcy Rule 8002 and Federal Rule 58 can sometimes look like this. Carolina and Khaled have a much simpler solution.
Consumer Protection
Vacationers Beware: Timeshare Exit Companies May Be Scammers, not Saviors
Hogan Lovells Publications | 17 February 2020
"The Net Short": U.S. and European High-Yield Covenant Trends in Response to Net Short Activism
Key Notes:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a consumer’s Truth in Lending Act (TILA) claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, holding that the claim was barred by the jurisdiction-stripping provision of the federal Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA).
A copy of the opinion in Shaw v. Bank of America is available at: Link to Opinion.
On August 23, 2019, Congress passed, and the President signed into law, Public Law 116-54 known as the “Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019” or “SBRA.” It takes effect on February 19, 2020. The SBRA adds a provision (namely subchapter V) to Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code to make the reorganization process less complicated, and thus less expensive, for small businesses. The Act generally defines a small business as a debtor with less than approximately $2.7 Million of secured and unsecured debt.
Today, February 19, 2020, the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA) becomes effective. Signed into law on August 23, 2019, this new subchapter to Chapter 11 reorganization is available to address problems encountered by small business debtors in reorganization under the provisions of the United States Bankruptcy Code.
SBRA is intended to facilitate the reorganization of a small business, with the goal of making small business bankruptcy proceedings more efficient and economical. The key components of SBRA are as follows:
Executive Summary
In any bankruptcy, there are inevitably winners and losers. The winners do not always do virtuous acts to win and the losers are not necessarily evil. Rather, dividing up a limited pie, the bankruptcy courts must leave some creditors short-changed. A good example is the recent 7th Circuit case involving a supplier and a lender. (hhgregg, Inc. et al. (Debtor). Whirlpool Corporation v. Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, and GACP Finance Co., LLC, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 18-3363, February 11, 2020) |
In Whirlpool Corporation v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al. (In re hhgregg, Inc.), No. 18-3363 (7th Cir. Feb. 11, 2020), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA“) created a federal priority rule rendering a secured lender’s first-priority, floating liens on inventory superior to the reclamation claims of a trade vendor. The facts in the case are typical, and the holding does not mark a demonstrative shift in common practice.
Facts