On August 12, 2021, nursery and landscaping company Moon Group of Chesapeake City, MD filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 21-11140). According to the petition, several affiliates are also expected to file. The company reports up to $50,000 in assets and $10 million to $50 million in liabilities.

A key goal of the Bankruptcy Code is to prevent corporate insiders from profiting from their employer’s misfortune. Section 503(c) of the Code makes clear: “there shall neither be allowed, nor paid... a transfer made to, or an obligation incurred for the benefit of, an insider of the debtor for the purpose of inducing such person to remain with the debtor's business” absent certain court-approved circumstances.

On August 1, 2021, Alpha Latam Management, LLC, a Miami-based financial services company that historically provides consumer loans in Latin America, along with certain affiliates, filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case 21-11109).  The company reports $100 million to $500 million in estimated assets and $500 million to $1 billion in estimated liabilities.  As described further in the 

On July 29, 2021, GBG USA, Inc., along with several affiliates, filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Lead Case No. 21-11369). The ultimate parent company of GBG USA, Inc.

Some courts permit debtors to designate vendors crucial to their business as “critical vendors.” These vendors supply debtors with necessary goods or services. Debtors are permitted to pay them amounts owing when a bankruptcy case is filed. Accordingly, critical vendors often recover more on their pre-petition claims than other unsecured creditors. In other words, critical vendors could receive a full recovery, while other creditors only receive a fraction of what they are owed.

The Bankruptcy Code grants the power to avoid certain transactions to a bankruptcy trustee or debtor-in-possession. See, e.g., 11 U.S.C. §§ 544, 547–48. Is there a general requirement that these avoidance powers only be used when doing so would benefit creditors? In a recent decision, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico addressed this question, concluding, in the face of a split of authority, that there was such a requirement.

On July 8, 2021, Pipeline Foods, LLC, along with several affiliates, which operate a Minnesota-based organic food supply chain company, filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 21-11002). The company estimates $100 to $500 million in assets and liabilities.

A recent case before bankruptcy judge Karen B. Owens of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, In re Dura Auto. Sys., LLC, No. 19-12378 (KBO), 2021 WL 2456944 (Bankr. D. Del. June 16, 2021), provides a cautionary reminder that the Third Circuit does not recognize the doctrine of implied assumption (i.e., assumptions implied through a course of conduct as opposed to those that are assumed pursuant to a motion and court order).

Late on July 6, 2021, MatlinPatterson Global Opportunities Partners II L.P., along with several affiliates, filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Lead Case No. 21-11255).

On July 2, 2021, Something Sweet, Inc., a New Haven, Connecticut-based bakery that “provides high quality pies and cakes to the largest retailers in the country,” filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 21-10993). The company estimates $10 to $50 million in assets and liabilities.