Fulltext Search
Corporate minds do not all think alike: The Supreme Court affirms a purposive approach to the corporate attribution doctrine

Two recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions demonstrate that the corporate attribution doctrine is not a one-size-fits-all approach.

Canada, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, Supreme Court of Canada
There’s Something About (Hail) Mary: Appeals of Sale Processes and Pre-Receivership Sale Agreements

Court approval of a sale process in receivership or Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”) proposal proceedings is generally a procedural order and objectors do not have an appeal as of right; they must seek leave and meet a high test in order obtain it. However, in Peakhill Capital Inc. v.

Canada, Ontario, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, McCarthy Tétrault LLP
Section 363 Sales — Is Section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code Jurisdictional?

The Bankruptcy Protector

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP
Confusion Involving Constitutionality of U.S. Trustee Fee Increase

The Bankruptcy Protector

In 2017, Congress enacted an amendment imposing a sharp increase in quarterly fees owed to the United States Trustee program by many chapter 11 debtors. Expectedly, the constitutionality of that decision has been challenged on several grounds, and there is considerable disagreement among the circuits.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
Filing a Proof of Claim Does Not Preserve an Administrative Expense Claim

The Bankruptcy Protector

A Texas bankruptcy judge has determined that a landlord will not be entitled to an administrative claim for post-petition rent as it failed to file and prosecute a timely motion for allowance of the administrative rent claim holding that a previously and timely filed proof of claim is insufficient. In re: Taco Bueno Restaurants Inc., --- B.R --- (Docket No. 18-33678), 2019 WL 4010681 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. Aug. 23, 2019).

The Filing and Lease Rejection

USA, Texas, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Title 11 of the US Code
Eighth Circuit Approves Better Treatment for Creditors Making Backstop Agreements

Add the Eight Circuit to a growing list of courts that have found that a plan of reorganization which proposes better treatment for creditors who have agreed to purchase any leftover securities in an offering (a “backstop agreement”) done pursuant to that plan does not violate the requirement that each claim within a class of creditors receive the same treatment under 11 U.S.C. § 1123(a)(4). In re: Peabody Energy Corp., --- F.3d --- (Docket No. 18-1302) (8th Cir. August 9, 2019).

The Peabody Plan

USA, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, Debtor
Whirlpool Corporation v. HHGreg, Inc. (In re HHGregg, Inc.)

(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Dec. 4, 2017)

The bankruptcy court grants the motion to dismiss, finding the defendant’s security interest in the debtor’s assets, including its inventory, has priority over the plaintiff’s reclamation rights. The plaintiff sold goods to the debtor up to the petition date and sought either return of the goods delivered within the reclamation period or recovery of the proceeds from the sale of such goods. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 546(c), the Court finds the reclamation rights are subordinate and the complaint should be dismissed. Opinion below.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC, Debtor, United States bankruptcy court
In re Dickson

(Bankr. E.D. Ky. Nov. 22, 2017)

USA, Kentucky, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC
Bankruptcy opinions within a day or two of issuance from the Western and Eastern Districts of Kentucky, the Northern and Southern Districts of Indiana, the Sixth and Seventh Circuits, and the U.S. Supreme Court

(B.A.P. 6th Cir. Nov. 28, 2017)

The Sixth Circuit B.A.P. affirms the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of the Chapter 12 bankruptcy case. The court finds that the bankruptcy court failed to give the debtor proper notice and opportunity to be heard prior to the dismissal. However, the violation of due process was harmless error. The delay in filing a confirmable plan and continuing loss to the estate warranted the dismissal. Opinion below.

Judge: Preston

Attorney for Appellant: Heather McKeever

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC, Bankruptcy, Supreme Court of the United States, United States bankruptcy court, Sixth Circuit, Seventh Circuit
Cox v. Specialty Vehicle Solutions, LLC

(6th Cir. Nov. 14, 2017)

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC, Sixth Circuit