In re SJT Ventures, LLC, 2010 WL 3342206 (Bankr. N.D. Texas 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
Paloian v LaSalle Bank, NA, 619 F.3d 688 (7th Cir. 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
Hitchin Post Steak Co v General Electric Capital Corporation (In re HP Distribution, LLP), 436 B.R. 679 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Kansas considered whether commercial vehicle leases that contained Terminal Rental Adjustment Clauses (or TRAC provisions) were true leases under Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code or, instead, disguised financing transactions. The court held that the TRAC leases were true leases that must be either assumed or assigned pursuant to the terms of Section 365.
Good v RMR Investments, Inc, 428 BR 249 (ED Texas, March 31, 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
A secured creditor in a chapter 11 case objected to the confirmation of the reorganization plan of the debtor, arguing that the proper “cramdown” interest rate (court-modified rate) was the pre-petition contractual default rate, rather than the significantly lower cramdown rate. After the debtor appealed, the District Court affirmed, holding that utilizing the contract rate of interest was appropriate because the debtor was solvent.
Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Allegheny Health, Education and Research Foundation v PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP(3d Cir No 07-1397, May 28, 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
Longview Aluminum, LLC v Brandt (In re Longview Aluminum, LLC), 2010 WL 2635787 (ND Ill, June 28, 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
In re 15375 Memorial Corporation, et al, 430 BR 142 (Bankr D Del May 17, 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
A Florida bankruptcy court recently clarified what constitutes a contract to extend financial accommodations for the benefit of the debtor, and the circumstances in which those contracts could be assumed, rejected or terminated. In re Ernie Haire Ford, Inc., 403 B.R. 750 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2009).
A recent opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit confirms that “actual control” over a debtor is not necessary to qualify as a nonstatutory “insider” for the purpose of extending the period for preference recovery under Section 547 of the Bankruptcy Code. See Schubert v. Lucent Technologies, Inc. (In re Winstar Communications, Inc.), 554 F.3d 382 (3rd Cir. 2009).