Fulltext Search
Second Circuit Picks a Side in Non-Consensual Third-Party Releases in Highly Anticipated Purdue Opinion

Introduction

Non-consensual third-party releases are provisions in reorganization plans that release non-debtor parties from liability to other non-debtor parties without the consent of all potential claimholders. These releases are frequently included in chapter 11 plans of reorganization. Most circuit courts allow these releases under certain circumstances; however, there is a split among circuit courts as to whether such non-consensual third-party releases are permitted by the Bankruptcy Code.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, A&O Shearman, Bankruptcy, Second Circuit, US District Court for the Southern District of New York, U.S. Court of Appeals
Ninth Circuit Rules that the solvent debtor exception is alive and well in pg&e

Introduction

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, A&O Shearman, Ninth Circuit
Ninth Circuit Finally Abandons Entz-White: Default-Rate Interest Required to Cure and Reinstate Secured Debt Under Chapter 11 Plan

In 1994, Congress amended the Bankruptcy Code to add section 1123(d), which provides that, if a chapter 11 plan proposes to "cure" a default under a contract, the cure amount must be determined in accordance with the underlying agreement and applicable nonbankruptcy law. Since then, a substantial majority of courts, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, have held that such a cure amount must include any default-rate interest required under either the contract or applicable nonbankruptcy law.

USA, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Jones Day, Default (finance), Ninth Circuit, Eleventh Circuit
Ninth Circuit Abandons Entz-White: Default-Rate Interest Required to Cure and Reinstate Secured Debt Under Chapter 11 Plan

In 1994, Congress amended the Bankruptcy Code to add section 1123(d), which provides that, if a chapter 11 plan proposes to "cure" a default under a contract, the cure amount must be determined in accordance with the underlying agreement and applicable nonbankruptcy law. Since then, a substantial majority of courts, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, have held that such a cure amount must include any default-rate interest required under either the contract or applicable nonbankruptcy law. See, e.g., JPMCC 2006-LDP7 Miami Beach Lodging, LLC v.

USA, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Jones Day, Ninth Circuit
Eleventh Circuit weighs in on section 1123(d): reinstatement of defaulted loan agreement under chapter 11 plan requires payment of default-rate interest

In 1994, Congress amended the Bankruptcy Code to, among other things, add section 1123(d), which provides that, if a chapter 11 plan proposes to “cure” a default under a contract, the cure amount must be determined in accordance with the underlying agreement and applicable nonbankruptcy law. Since then, a majority of courts have held that such a cure amount must include any default-rate interest required under either the contract or applicable nonbankruptcy law. A ruling recently handed down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit endorses this view.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Jones Day, Interest, Default (finance), Eleventh Circuit