Fulltext Search
Rooker-Feldman Doctrine Doesn't Prevent Certain Bankruptcy Court Decisions

In an opinion issued on Sept. 20 by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico, Judge David T. Thuma held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not prevent a bankruptcy court from determining whether the automatic stay applies to pending state court litigation. See In re Shook, Case No. 24-10724-t7 (Bankr. N.M. Sept. 20, 2024) [ECF No. 54].

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
„Sanieren oder Ausscheiden“ - mit Hilfe des StaRUGs?!

In StaRUG-Verfahren gehen oftmals Gesellschafterstreitigkeiten voraus oder entstehen im Laufe der Sanierung.

European Union, Germany, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, CMS Germany
Wegbereiter der Sanierung - Verfahrenshilfen im StaRUG

Ein Überblick über Inhalt und Anforderungen der planergänzenden Sanierungsinstrumente des StaRUG zum zielgerichteten Einsatz in der Praxis.

European Union, Germany, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, CMS Germany
3 Jahre StaRUG - eine Zwischenbilanz

Dieser erste Beitrag der Blogserie StaRUG gibt einen Überblick über die Chancen und Schwierigkeiten bei der Anwendung des StaRUG in der Praxis.

Germany, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, CMS Germany
Fifth Circuit Holds that Post-Judgment Interest is Required in Adversary Proceeding Under 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a)

In Matter of Imperial Petroleum Recovery Corp., 84 F.4th 264 (5th Cir. 2023), the Fifth Circuit was asked to address whether 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) – the federal statute providing for post-judgment interest – applies in adversary proceedings even though 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) doesn’t explicitly refer to bankruptcy courts.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP
Will the Supreme Court Grant Cert to Address the Issue of the Appropriate Post-Siegel Remedy? Unlikely.

In earlier posts, the Red Zone has discussed the Supreme Court’s ruling in Siegel v. Fitzgerald, 142 S. Ct. 1770 (2022), which held that increased U.S.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
Insolvenzantragspflicht und Prognosezeitraum nach § 4 Abs. 2 SanInsKG

Seit 9. November 2022 ist das SanInsKG mit (scheinbaren) Erleichterungen im Zusammenhang mit der Insolvenzantragspflicht und dem Prognosezeitraum in Kraft.

Das „Sanierungs- und insolvenzrechtliches Krisenfolgenabmilderungsgesetz“ (SanInsKG) hat die Regeln für die Fortbestehensprognose bei Überschuldung geändert, insbesondere den Prognosezeitraum nach § 19 Abs. 2 InsO bis zum 31. Dezember 2023 von zwölf auf vier Monate verkürzt.

Germany, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, CMS Germany
Fifth Circuit Hold that Courts May Bypass Equitable Mootness to Rule on the Merits of Appeal

In Matter of Texxon Petrochemicals, L.L.C., 67 F.4th 259 (5th Cir. 2023), the Fifth Circuit held that even if an appeal is equitably moot, the appellate court nonetheless has appellate jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal, without reaching the issue of equitable mootness.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP
Does Electricity Supplied Within 20 Days of a Bankruptcy Qualify for Section 503(b)(9) Priority Status? Recent Decisions Say “No”

Section 503(b)(9) Overview

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, Uniform Commercial Code (USA)
Fifth Circuit Holds that Section 363(m)’s “Good Faith Purchaser” Protection Applies to Secured Creditor that Used “Economic Leverage” in Connection with Credit Bid for Assets

On April 17, 2023, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Matter of RE Palm Springs II, L.L.C., 2023 WL 2966520 (5th Cir. April 17, 2023), held that a senior lender who uses economic leverage and asserts its legal rights to squeeze out a junior lender remains a good faith purchaser entitled to declare an appeal moot based on a sale under section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code. Key to the Fifth Circuit’s opinion was the fact that the actions in question were disclosed to the bankruptcy court in advance of it making the section 363(m) finding.

Facts

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, Coronavirus