Fulltext Search
Supreme Court Denies Petition for Certiorari in Tribune Creditors’ Case

In March, we reported on a brief filed by the Solicitor General recommending denial of a petition for certiorari filed by Tribune creditors seeking Supreme Court review of the Second Circuit ruling dismissing their state-law fraudulent transfer claims.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, Supreme Court of the United States, Second Circuit
Appeals Court Rules That a Discharge Injunction Bars a Fraudulent Transfer Claim Based on a Non-Dischargeable Debt

A discharge of debt in bankruptcy “operates as an injunction against the commencement or continuation of an action, the employment of process, or an act, to collect, recover or offset any such debt as a personal liability of the debtor. . . .” 11 U.S.C. § 524(a)(2). Certain debts, however, including debts “for violation of . . . any of the State securities laws,” are not subject to discharge. See 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(19). A discharge injunction does not bar the collection of such debts.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, Eleventh Circuit
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
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
Delaware Bankruptcy Court Issues Decision on Whether a Debtor Can Be a “Financial Participant”

We have blogged previously about section 546(e), the Bankruptcy Code’s safe harbor for certain transfers otherwise subject to avoidance as preferences or fraudulent transfers. See 11 U.S.C. § 546(e). Among the transfers protected by the section 546(e) safe harbor are transfers by or to a “financial participant” made “in connection with a securities contract.” Id.

USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP
Attention Buyers of Assets in Bankruptcy: How To Be A Good Faith Purchaser and Ensure Any Post-Closing Challenges Will Be Dismissed as Statutorily Moot Under Section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code

Introduction

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP
Warning to Directors of Selling Companies: Breach of Fiduciary Duty Liability May Exist for Failure to Investigate and Ensure Solvency of Company Post-Closing and Propriety and Effect of All Related Transactions (But You Can Protect Yourself)

A recent ruling from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York sent shock waves through the legal and financial community, with some shouting that this “could be a gamestopper for the private equity business.”1 Although the ruling in In re Nine West LBO Securities Litigation2 breaks new ground and arguably narrows the protections available to directors under the normally-broad business judgment rule, there are clear lessons others can take from this saga to prevent a similar fate.

USA, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Private equity, Due diligence
Yeah, We Can Take It - Texas Bankruptcy Court Defines the Scope of Its Post-Confirmation Jurisdiction

Executive Summary

A recent decision from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, In re Care Ctrs., LLC, No. 18-33967, 2020 Bankr. LEXIS 3205 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. Nov. 12, 2020), examined (1) the scope of bankruptcy court subject-matter jurisdiction for post-confirmation actions filed in state court and removed to bankruptcy court; and (2) when the court must or should abstain and remand a proceeding back to the court where the action was originally brought.

USA, Texas, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP
Eastern District of Virginia Bankruptcy Court Finds Landlord’s Lender Has No Right to Enforce Landlord’s Lease with Bankrupt Retailer

OVERVIEW

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Real Estate, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Coronavirus
Bankruptcy Court Denies Section 546(e) Safe Harbor Protection in Fraudulent Transfer Action

The Bankruptcy Code enables a trustee to set aside certain transfers made by debtors before bankruptcy. See 11 U.S.C. §§ 544, 547, 548. These avoidance powers are subject to certain limitations, including a safe harbor in section 546(e) exempting certain transfers. Among other things, section 546(e) bars avoidance of a “settlement payment . . . made by or to (or for the benefit of) . . . a financial institution [or] a transfer made by or to (or for the benefit of) a . . . financial institution . . .

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, Title 11 of the US Code