In re WM Six Forks, LLC, Case No. 12-05854-8-ATS, 2013 WL 5354748 (Bankr. E.D.N.C., Sept. 23, 2013)
CASE SNAPSHOT
Dill Oil Company, LLC v. Stephens, No. 11-6309 (10th Cir., Jan. 15, 2013)
CASE SNAPSHOT
The Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, in a case of first impression before the court, joined the Fourth Circuit in holding that the absolute priority rule remains applicable in individual chapter 11 cases.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In re Burcam Capital II, LLC, Case No. 12-04729-8-JRL (Bankr. E.D.N.C., Feb. 15, 2013)
CASE SNAPSHOT
In re Maharaj, 681 F.3d 558 (4th Cir. 2012)
CASE SNAPSHOT
The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is the first court of appeals to determine whether the absolute priority rule continues to apply to individual chapter 11 debtors. Taking the "narrow view" adopted by certain courts, the Fourth Circuit held that the rule was not abrogated by the amendments of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, and therefore affirmed the bankruptcy court’s order denying confirmation of the proposed plan.
In re Premier Golf Properties, L.P., BAP No. SC- 11-1508-HPaJu (9th Cir. BAP, Aug. 13, 2012)
CASE SNAPSHOT
The Ninth Circuit B.A.P. affirmed the bankruptcy court decision that post-petition income from greens fees and driving range fees were not “rents, proceeds, or profits” of the secured lender’s pre-petition blanket security interest on all real and personal property (and “all proceeds thereof”) within the meaning of section 552(b), and thus were not cash collateral.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has issued a case useful for credit bidders that successfully bid on their own collateral at a bankruptcy sale, which goes forward without a specific agreement "carving out" expenses. Borrego Springs Bank N.A. v. Skuna River Lumber L.L.C., (In re Skuna River Lumber, LLC), 564 F.3d 353 (5th Cir. 2009).
In a harshly worded decision, a federal bankruptcy judge concluded that a syndicated loan product was so one-sided in favor of the lender as to "shock the conscience" of the court. The judge therefore equitably subordinated the secured lender's claim. See In re Yellowstone Mountain Club, LLC, No. 08-61570, 2009 WL 1324950 (Bankr. D. Mont. May 12, 2009).
Yellowstone Mountain Club