Fulltext Search
You Get What You Get and You Don’t Get Upset: Delaware Bankruptcy Court Enforces Anti-Assignment Clause

On June 20, 2018, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware issued a decision sustaining the debtors’ objection to the proof of claim filed by Contrarian Funds, LLC.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, A&O Shearman
Delaware Bankruptcy Court Finds Anti-Assignment Clauses in Debt Documents Enforceable in Claim Objection Fight with Postpetition Debt Purchaser

On June 20, 2018, Judge Kevin J. Carey of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware sustained an objection to a proof of claim filed by a postpetition debt purchaser premised on anti-assignment clauses contained in transferred promissory notes. In re Woodbridge Group of Companies, LLC, et al., No. 17-12560, at *14 (jointly administered) (Bankr. D. Del. Jun. 20, 2018).

USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Ya Gotta Have [Good] Faith: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Holds That in the Context of Plan Voting, a Bad Faith Showing Requires More Than a Negative Impact on Creditors

When it comes to voting on a plan, Section 1126(e) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a bankruptcy court may designate (or disallow) the votes of any entity whose vote to accept or reject was not made in “good faith” (a term that is not defined in the Bankruptcy Code).

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, A&O Shearman, Ninth Circuit
The Ninth Circuit Vacates Bankruptcy Court’s Designation Order, Holding That Purchasing a Subset of Available Claims to Block a Plan, Absent An Ulterior Motive, Does Not Constitute Bad Faith

Summary

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Ninth Circuit
Connecticut Bankruptcy Court Holds That Trademark Licensee Does Not Automatically Lose the Right to Use Trademarks When Debtor-Licensor Rejects License, Siding with Seventh Circuit in Circuit Split

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut recently examined a question at the heart of an existing circuit split regarding the consequences of trademark license rejection in bankruptcy: can a trademark licensee retain the use of a licensed trademark post-rejection? In re SIMA International, Inc., 2018 WL 2293705 (Bankr. D. Conn. May 17, 2018).

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Trademarks, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Not So Safe: The Supreme Court Clarifies the Scope of the Bankruptcy Code’s Section 546(e) Safe Harbor Provision

Section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code shields certain transfers involving settlement payments and other payments in connection with securities contracts (for example, payment for stock) made to certain financial intermediaries, such as banks, from avoidance as a fraudulent conveyance or preferential transfer. In recent years, several circuit courts interpreted 546(e) as applying to a transfer that flows through a financial intermediary, even if the ultimate recipient of the transfer would not qualify for the protection of 546(e).

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, A&O Shearman, Supreme Court of the United States
Supreme Court Holds That Presence of Financial Conduits Does Not Trigger “Safe Harbor” Protection for Securities-Related Transfers Under Section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code

On February 27, 2018, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split regarding the proper application of the safe harbor set forth in section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code, a provision that prohibits the avoidance of a transfer if the transfer was made in connection with a securities contract and made by or to (or for the benefit of) certain qualified entities, including a financial institution.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
Ninth Circuit Holds That Joint Plan Covering Multiple Debtors Must Be Approved by Only One Impaired Class Per Plan, Not One Impaired Class Per Debtor

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that section 1129(a)(10) of the Bankruptcy Code – a provision which, in effect, prohibits confirmation of a plan unless the plan has been accepted by at least one impaired class of claims – applies on “per plan” rather than a “per debtor” basis, even when the plan at issue covers multiple debtors. In re Transwest Resort Properties, Inc., 2018 WL 615431 (9th Cir. Jan. 25, 2018). The Court is the first circuit court to address the issue.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Ninth Circuit
(Make) Wholly Moly: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Upholds Ruling Denying Noteholders’ Entitlement to a Make-Whole Payment

On October 20, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a decision which, among other things,[1] affirmed the lower courts’ holding that certain noteholders were not entitled to payment of a make-whole premium. The Second Circuit held that the make-whole premium only was due in the case of an optional redemption, and not in the case of an acceleration brought about by a bankruptcy filing.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, A&O Shearman, Second Circuit, Third Circuit
A Decision of Interest: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Opines on the Proper Interest Rate Under the Cramdown Provisions of Chapter 11

On October 20, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an important decision regarding the manner in which interest must be calculated to satisfy the cramdown requirements in a chapter 11 case.[1] The Second Circuit sided with Momentive’s senior noteholders and found that “take back” paper issued pursuant to a chapter 11 plan should bear a market rate of interest when the market rate can be ascerta

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, A&O Shearman, Second Circuit