Fulltext Search
Arbitrate? You Can’t Make Me! Rejection Trumps Arbitration, Says Texas Bankruptcy Court

Overview

USA, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Federal Arbitration Act 1926 (USA)
The Third Circuit Lets the Katz Out of the Bag: No Sovereign Immunity for California in the Post-Confirmation Venoco Dispute

The Executive Summary provided a short version of the facts. The next few paragraphs provide a longer version, or you can skip to the next section.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, European Commission, Supreme Court of the United States
Prepetition Claim or Postpetition Claim? The Timing of a Claim When A Debtor’s Prepetition Wrongful Actions Continue Postpetition

Executive Summary

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
Sixth Circuit Affirms Holding that Contributions to a 401(k) Plan Made More than Six Months Prior to Bankruptcy Cannot be Excluded from Disposable Income

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently ruled in a case involving a Chapter 13 debtors’ attempt to shield contributions to a 401(k) retirement account from “projected disposable income,” therefore making such amounts inaccessible to the debtors’ creditors.[1] For the reasons explained below, the Sixth Circuit rejected the debtors’ arguments.

Case Background

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Foster Swift Collins & Smith PC
Sixth Circuit Upholds Chapter 13 Debtor’s Right to Request and Receive Dismissal of Bankruptcy Case

A statute must be interpreted and enforced as written, regardless, according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, “of whether a court likes the results of that application in a particular case.” That legal maxim guided the Sixth Circuit’s reasoning in a recent decision[1] in a case involving a Chapter 13 debtor’s repeated filings and requests for dismissal of his bankruptcy cases in order to avoid foreclosure of his home.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Foster Swift Collins & Smith PC, Supreme Court of the United States
Bankruptcy No Sanctuary Against Government Enforcement Actions: NRA’s Chapter 11 Case Dismissed as Bad Faith Filing

Executive Summary

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Corporate governance
A Reminder That a 9019 Motion Is Not a Slam Dunk: Bankruptcy Court Denies 9019 Motion After Determining That Approving Certain Findings Required By Settlement Would Amount to Inappropriate Advisory Opinion

Introduction

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Bankruptcy
The Aftermath of a Complicated Breakup: Third Circuit Holds Stalking Horse Bidder in Terminated Transaction May Assert Potential Administrative Expense Claim Notwithstanding Disallowance of Its Termination Fee

Executive Summary

On March 15, 2021, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (the “Third Circuit”) held that a stalking horse bidder may assert an administrative expense claim pursuant to section 503(b)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code for costs incurred in attempting to close on an unsuccessful transaction, even when the stalking horse bidder is not entitled to a breakup or termination fee.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Due diligence
Supreme Court Holds that “Mere Retention” of Estate Property After Bankruptcy Filing Doesn't Violate the Automatic Stay

On January 14, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided City of Chicago, Illinois v. Fulton (Case No. 19-357, Jan. 14, 2021), a case which examined whether merely retaining estate property after a bankruptcy filing violates the automatic stay provided for by §362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. The Court overruled the bankruptcy court and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in deciding that mere retention of property does not violate the automatic stay.

Case Background

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Real Estate, Foster Swift Collins & Smith PC, Supreme Court of the United States
Officers of Selling Companies May Escape Fiduciary Duty Liability But May Be Required to Return Change of Control Payments if Company is Insolvent Post-Closing (Nine West Part 2)

While there has been much fuss over the recent ruling by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in In re Nine West LBO Securities Litigation1 due to its potential ramifications for director liability, as we explored in Part I of our series on this case here, court watchers have paid less attention to the court’s treatment of officer liability and the interes

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Private equity, Due diligence