The Bankruptcy Protector recently discussed notable non-bankruptcy provisions that must be consulted to ensure compliance with privacy issues. In this post, we discuss notable Bankruptcy Code provisions and Bankruptcy Rules on these issues.
Section 101(41) of the Bankruptcy Code—Personally Identifiable Information
Recently, Johnson & Johnson (J&J)—one of the most-recognizable companies in the world—has found itself the target of numerous product liability actions across the nation, defending itself against claims by plaintiffs alleging that J&J products caused them to develop cancer. Overwhelmingly, the cases have been brought by women who have developed ovarian cancer, but there also is a spate of cases that claim J&J’s products caused the plaintiff to develop mesothelioma.
Introduction
On September 9, 2019, the Treasury Department and IRS issued new proposed regulations (REG-125710-18) (the “Proposed Regulations”) affecting how companies with net operating losses (“NOLs” and such entities, “Loss Companies”) will calculate the ability to use such losses following an ownership change in the wake of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, P.L. 115-97 (2017) (“TCJA”).
On Friday, August 23, 2019, the President signed into law the first major amendments to the United States Bankruptcy Code since 2005. These promise to change the legal landscape for creditors.
We have written before about the virtual dead end faced by marijuana companies who try to seek protection in the bankruptcy courts. Almost uniformly, bankruptcy courts have shut their doors on marijuana companies, including their landlords and suppliers.
There is currently a split in authority on the issue of whether a trustee may recover from an immediate or mediate transferee if the recipient received proceeds from a fraudulent transfer but not the fraudulently transferred property itself.
Running a family-owned farm is not easy work under the best of economic circumstances, and it can be nearly impossible when times are tough. More than 30 years ago, during the mid-1980s, John Cougar Mellencamp’s mournful song “Rain on the Scarecrow” discussed the epidemic of family farm foreclosures hitting the American Heartland. Thankfully, the overall family farm economy is not at that crisis level today, but storm clouds are rumbling.
Consider these facts. A debtor in bankruptcy sued two parties for breach of contract. The debtor assigned its rights and interests in the cause of action to another entity. The defendants moved to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that the court now lacked jurisdiction over the case. They asserted that the debtor’s assignment of the cause of action destroyed the bankruptcy court’s “related to” jurisdiction. Who wins?