Winding Down. If a corporation’s board of directors decides that the business needs to be wound down, there are a number of legal paths to consider. Determining the best approach is fact-dependent, and the corporation and its board should get legal advice before making a decision.
Click here to view image.
Click here to view the image.
Almost every year, changes are made to the set of rules that govern how bankruptcy cases are managed — the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. The changes address issues identified by an Advisory Committee made up of federal judges, bankruptcy attorneys, and others.
If you doubted it before, you can stop now. The trend of courts finding ways to protect trademark licensees from the harsh effects of losing their trademark license rights in bankruptcy is in full swing.
On Monday, October 6, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order denying the petition for a writ of certiorari in the Jaffe v. Samsung case, also known as the Qimonda case.
When a key customer files bankruptcy, one of the first questions you will face is whether to keep doing business or end the relationship. (Another key question is making sure your pre-bankruptcy claim gets on file or otherwise acknowledged.) Since companies in bankruptcy (called debtors or debtors in possession) usually cannot survive without trade support, they often reach out to suppliers to ask for trade terms, or at least a steady supply of goods, after a Chapter 11 reorganization bankruptcy is filed.
It’s been several years since I last posted about objections to bankruptcy claims, and the topic is so important to creditors that it’s time to revisit it.
The Order Re Summary Judgment issued on June 11, 2014 by Judge Charles R. Breyer of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in the Heller Ehrman LLP bankruptcy case may prove to be a knock-out punch against “unfinished business” claims by insolvent or bankrupt law firms and their trustees.
Trademark Licenses At Risk. I have written a number of times on the blog about the impact of bankruptcy on trademark licenses, with a special focus on the risk that trademark licensees face if their licensors file bankruptcy.
The Stern v. Marshall Decision. In its 2011 decision in Stern v. Marshall, decided by a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court held that even though Congress designated certain state law counterclaims as “core” proceedings, Article III of the U.S. Constitution prohibits bankruptcy courts from finally adjudicating those claims. Stern v.