Fulltext Search
Debtor Is a Financial Institution for Purposes of Settlement Payment Safe Harbor, Rules Southern District of New York

On April 23, 2019, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, in fraudulent transfer litigation arising out of the 2007 leveraged buyout of the Tribune Company,1 ruled on one of the significant issues left unresolved by the US Supreme Court in its Merit Management decision last year.

USA, New York, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Mayer Brown, Bankruptcy, Supreme Court of the United States, US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Are Power Purchase and Similar Agreements Excluded from the Automatic Stay under the Safe Harbor for Forward Contracts? Recent US Utility Bankruptcies Raise This and Other Important Questions

Both the First Energy Solutions and PG&E bankruptcies have seen proceedings regarding power purchase and similar agreements (PPAs) that raise this question.

Background

Contracts often contain provisions that enable a party to terminate or modify the contract based on the other party's bankruptcy filing, insolvency or deteriorating financial condition. In general, the Bankruptcy Code renders these types of provisions (sometimes referred to as "ipso facto" clauses) ineffective. Specifically, under section 365(e)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code (emphasis added):

USA, Derivatives, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Mayer Brown, Title 11 of the US Code, United States bankruptcy court
Into the Void (Again): PG&E Intends to Enter Bankruptcy Proceedings - Possible Consequences for Renewable PPAs

After months of speculation, it is now official : PG&E (both the parent, PG&E Corporation, and its subsidiary, Pacific Gas & Electric Company), having faced extraordinary challenges relating to catastrophic wildfires in 2017 and 2018, has announced that a voluntary bankruptcy filing “is appropriate, necessary and in the best interests of all stakeholders, including wildfire claimants, PG&E’s other creditors and shareholders, and is ultimately the only viable option to restore PG&E’s financial stability to fund ongoing operations and provide safe service to customers.” As

USA, California, Energy & Natural Resources, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Mayer Brown, Renewable energy, Power purchase agreement, FERC, California Public Utilities Commission, Title 11 of the US Code, Federal Power Act 1920 (USA)
Delaware Bankruptcy Court Finds that Section 546(e) Does Not Protect Fraudulent Transfers Following Supreme Court’s Ruling in Merit Management

The Bottom Line

In one of the first applications of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the scope of section 546(e) in Merit Management, Delaware Bankruptcy Court Judge Carey found that section 546(e)’s safe harbor did not apply to fraudulent transfers between two parties that were not financial institutions, even if the transaction passed through financial intermediaries.

What Happened

USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, United States bankruptcy court
Delaware District Court Holds That a $30 Million Haircut Is Not Unfair Discrimination in a Cramdown Plan

The Bottom Line

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Third Circuit
Eighth Circuit Holds that Non-Profit, Non-Bankrupt Entities are Insulated from Substantive Consolidation

The Bottom Line:

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Eighth Circuit
Supreme Court Lakeridge Decision Clarifies the Standard of Review of Mixed Questions of Law and Fact — In this Case, Addressing Insider Status for Plan Confirmation and Cram-Down

In another decision affecting Chapter 11 cases, U.S. Bank National Association v. Village at Lakeridge, --- S. Ct. ---, 2018 WL 1143822 (2018), on March 5, 2018, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision, authored by Justice Kagan, affirming the Ninth Circuit’s decision to review the Bankruptcy Court’s determination of a mixed question of fact and law for clear error, rather than de novo.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
US Supreme Court Addresses Safe Harbor Under Bankruptcy Code

Merit Management Group, LP v. FTI Consulting, Inc., No. 16-784 (2018)

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Mayer Brown, Supreme Court of the United States
Third Circuit Applies More Flexible Standard for WARN Exemption

The Bottom Line:

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act 1988 (USA), Third Circuit
IRS Can Pursue “Responsible Persons” for Unpaid Trust Fund Taxes and Automatic Stay Cannot Be Used to Enjoin Collection Against Non-Debtor Officers and Directors

The Bottom Line

Puerto Rico, USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Private Client & Offshore Services, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Internal Revenue Service (USA), Eighth Circuit, Third Circuit, First Circuit