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

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.

In bankruptcy as in federal jurisprudence generally, to characterize something with the near-epithet of “federal common law” virtually dooms it to rejection.

In January 2020 we reported that, after the reconsideration suggested by two Supreme Court justices and revisions to account for the Supreme Court’s Merit Management decision,[1] the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit stood by its origina

The race to vaccinate Americans is likely to bring an end to the pandemic in the months ahead, but the outlook for the U.S. economy is far less certain. On Friday, the Federal Reserve Board delivered its Monetary Policy Report to Congress. While providing statistics suggesting that U.S. businesses could rebound when the pandemic ends, the report noted significant risks of business bankruptcies as well as a steep drop in commercial real estate prices.

It seems to be a common misunderstanding, even among lawyers who are not bankruptcy lawyers, that litigation in federal bankruptcy court consists largely or even exclusively of disputes about the avoidance of transactions as preferential or fraudulent, the allowance of claims and the confirmation of plans of reorganization. However, with a jurisdictional reach that encompasses “all civil proceedings . . .

The torrid pace of bankruptcy filings by U.S. businesses has ebbs and flows, but the tide is not receding. The economy continues to struggle under the weight of the COVID-19 pandemic.

There has not been any substantial change in the fundamentals of the business cycle and Washington has been unable to produce another round of stimuli. So, we need to be careful about drawing conclusions from any short term variance in the rate of bankruptcy filings.

I don’t know if Congress foresaw, when it enacted new Subchapter V of Chapter 11 of the Code[1] in the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (“SBRA”), that debtors in pending cases would seek to convert or redesignate their cases as Subchapter V cases when SBRA became effective on February 19, 2020, but it was foreseeable.

Since the end of the first quarter of 2020, bankruptcy professionals have been planning for a substantial increase in business bankruptcies. The newest statistics tell us that the wait is over. These bankruptcy filings follow the sustained economic contraction rooted in the COVID pandemic. But it would be too simplistic to say that COVID is the sole cause of this trend. Most of the businesses that have filed faced other challenges, such as heavy debt burdens, deteriorating markets or strategic missteps.

Our February 26 post [1] reported on the first case dealing with the question whether a debtor in a pending Chapter 11 case may redesignate it as a case under Subchapter V, [2] the new subchapter of Chapter 11 adopted by the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (“SBRA”), which became effective on February 19.