As discussed in previousposts, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (the “Act”) was signed into law on December 27, 2020, largely to address the harsh economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the previous four articles in this series (see here) we looked at the key role of professional investors at startups, though also at the setbacks of the exclusive dependence of these types of companies on equity and the advantages debt would have for them. The environment, as we saw, is also a favorable one for borrowing. We described the difficulty to provide general recipes for getting debt and a few not very promising routes.

En los cuatro artículos anteriores de esta serie (ver aquí) analizamos el papel clave de los inversores profesionales en las 'startups', pero también las desventajas de la exclusiva dependencia de este tipo de empresas del 'equity' y las ventajas que tendría la deuda para ellas. El entorno, como vimos, es además favorable para el endeudamiento. Abordamos la dificultad de ofrecer recetas generales para conseguir deuda y algunas vías no muy prometedoras.

With courts and government agencies around the world enacting emergency measures in response to the Covid-19 pandemic – ranging from complete shutdowns to delays and limitations – advancing the ball in dispute resolution is more challenging than ever. Because fraud investigations and complex asset recovery matters are typically managed by litigation counsel and often follow litigated claims, clients have a tendency to see the effort through a litigation lens.

In a recent decision by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, Weisfelner, v. Fund 1, et al. (In re Lyondell Chem. Co.), 2014 Bankr. LEXIS 159 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.