El tribunal ha dictado un auto que se detiene sobre determinadas prácticas que se han producido en las subastas extrajudiciales de algunos procesos de liquidación. Concretamente, descarta la posibilidad de cobrar una comisión cuando el adjudicatario en la subasta es el propio acreedor con privilegio especial.

The appeal court has issued a decision which constitutes a reminder to be careful in relation to practices that have been occurring in certain out-of-court auctions within liquidation proceedings. Particularly, it rejects the possibility that a commission fee is collected when the winning bidder is the secured creditor whose security interest levies the asset sold.

At first glance, Stanziale v. MILK072011, looks like someone suing over a bad expiration date and conjures up images of Ron Burgundy proclaiming “milk was a bad choice.” But in actuality Stanziale is much more interesting: it answers whether one can breach their fiduciary duty by exposing an employer to a claim under the aptly-named WARN Act, which requires employers to tip off their workers to a possible job loss.