Because no recent opinions have been published by the Delaware Bankruptcy Court, I wanted to touch on a subject that is vital in nearly every preference or fraudulent transfer case: The Statute of Limitations For A Preference Claim
A. Statute of Limitations
– But they weren’t as oppressive as my subject line may imply.
In a 13 page decision, released April 22, 2016, Judge Gross of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court granted a motion to dismiss an adversary proceeding and sanctioned the Plaintiff – disallowing any further litigation against the defendants in the Bankruptcy Court. Judge Gross’ opinion is available here (the “Opinion”).
Summary
Summary
In a 17 page decision entered March 9, 2012, Judge Carey of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court granted a motion for relief from the Bankruptcy Code’s automatic stay to allow an undersecured creditor to exercise its remedies against a debtor’s collateral. A copy of Judge Carey's opinion is available here (the "Opinion"). The Opinion was issued in a case nearly identical to that discussed in this post:
Summary
Summary
In a 32 page decision signed January 3, 2012, Judge Walrath of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court ruled that holders of litigation tracking warrants that would be paid out in stock of the debtor were equity instruments, and would be paid out at the same priority as common equity under the bankruptcy plan. Judge Walrath’s opinion is available here (the “Opinion”).
Background
Summary
At approximately 10:15 this morning, Judge Walrath of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court made an oral ruling confirming Washington Mutual's chapter 11 plan of reorganization.
Over the last three and one-half years, hundreds of attorneys and other professionals have worked thousands of hours in an effort to help WAMU obtain a measure of relief from its debts so that it could emerge from bankruptcy protection with the ability to continue to operate. What has emerged from the process is a smaller, leaner company with a greatly reduced debt load.