Last month, Jeoffrey Burtch, the Chapter 7 Trustee (the "Trustee") in the Opus East bankruptcy filed approximately 90 preference actions against various defendants. As stated in his complaints, the Trustee "seeks to avoid and recover ... all preferential transfers of property made for or on account of an antecedent debt made to or for the benefit of the Defendant by the Debtor during the ninety-day period prior to the filing of the Debtor's bankruptcy petition under 11 U.S.C. sec.
Introduction
The US Supreme Court has ruled in Stern v. Marshall (June 23, 2011) that a bankruptcy court lacks jurisdiction to render final judgment on a bankruptcy estate’s compulsory counterclaim against a creditor arising under common law, despite a statutory grant of jurisdiction.
Introduction
Last month, the Chapter 7 trustee (the "Trustee") in the Viashow bankruptcy filed avoidance actions against several creditors of the bankruptcy estate. One avoidance action in particular seeks to recover damages allegedly sustained by Viashow due to breaches of fiduciary duties by its officers and directors (the "D&O Action"). In addition to Viashow's officers and directors, the D&O Action seeks damages against defendants who allegedly "aided and abetted" the officers and directors in their breach.
Introduction
Last week, Visteon Corporation began filing preference complaints against hundreds of current and former creditors of the company. This post will look briefly at the nature of Visteon’s business, why the company filed for bankruptcy, as well some of the likely “next steps” now that the company has filed its preference complaints.
The Bankruptcy Filing
Introduction
Introduction
In a decision released on March 29, 2011, CDX Liquidating Trust v. Venrock Assocs., et al., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 6390 (7th Cir. March 29, 2011), the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, reversing the district court’s ruling, held that a director’s disclosure of a conflict, in and of itself, is insufficient to protect that director from liability for breach of fiduciary duty or disloyalty arising from that conflict.
In what appears to be a matter of first impression, Bankruptcy Judge Robert D. Drain, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, has held that a statutory safe harbor against constructive fraudulent conveyance actions under the Bankruptcy Code involving securities transfers does not apply to the private sale of securities, even when there are no allegations of illegal conduct or fraud involved in the underlying transaction.