In large chapter 11 cases, millions of dollars often hinge on the appropriate interest rate. Chapter 11 debtors may not require impaired secured creditors to accept a proposed plan of reorganization unless the plan provides that secured creditors will receive future payments that are equivalent to the value of the creditors’ secured claims. In order to satisfy this requirement, a debtor must propose an interest rate that will compensate these creditors for receiving deferred cash payments in lieu of a lump sum.
Extra Extra Read All About It. It was a cataclysmic weekend in college football for the Big 12 conference. The college football playoff committee elevated the one-loss Ohio State Buckeyes (Big 10) into the fourth and final slot in the inaugural College Football Playoff, taming a one-loss Baylor Bears (Big 12) sloth and a one-loss TCU Horned Frogs (Big 12) colony in the process. Some naysayers may look to the Big 12′s soft schedules and the absence of a league tiebreaker game as drivers of the committee’s decision.
In recent cases where lawyers have signed proofs of claim for their clients and litigation ensued, the signing attorneys were deposed with respect to the facts surrounding submission of the claims. For some time, an attorney who signed a proof of claim on his client’s behalf has been risking disqualification or being called as a fact witness concerning the factual basis for the claim in related litigation.
As many areas continue to rebound slightly from the real-estate downturn, much litigation still exists related to the exposure of guarantors for corporate-entity real estate loans. In many instances a corporation or Limited Liability Company (LLC) may have filed for Chapter 11 in an effort to stave off a foreclosure and restructure the secured debt. However, it is well settled that a corporate bankruptcy case does not operate to discharge a guaranty from a guarantor who is not in bankruptcy.
As wealth preservation for future generations has become a popular topic among clients, estate planning practitioners have changed their tune when advising clients on how distributions should be made to beneficiaries.
In its Scantling opinion, the Eleventh Circuit held that a Chapter 20 debtor (a chapter 13 debtor who previously filed and concluded a chapter 7 case) could strip off valueless junior liens on her principal residence even thought she was ineligible for a discharge in the chapter 13 case. Full disclosure: our firm, Berger Singerman, represented the appellee, Ms. Scantling.
If you’re a secured lender, news of a Chapter 11 filing by your borrower can be unsettling. The commencement of a Chapter 11 case triggers an “automatic stay” which, with certain exceptions, operates as an injunction against all actions affecting the debtor or its property.3 Under the automatic stay, a secured lender holding a security interest in the debtor’s property may not repossess or foreclose on that property without the permission of the bankruptcy court.
The Eleventh Circuit’s recent opinion in Wiand v. Lee clarifies longstanding issues relating to an equity receiver’s standing to pursue clawback claims for the benefit of the receivership estate under the Florida Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“FUFTA”). See Wiand v. Lee, 2014 WL 2446084 (11th Cir. Jun.
The inclusion of pre-bankruptcy waivers in “standard issue” credit documents has generated a host of litigation in bankruptcy cases about the enforceability of such provisions.
In a closely-watched case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently affirmed the decision of the Delaware District Court, holding that bankruptcy claims are subject to disallowance under section 502(d) of the Bankruptcy Code despite their subsequent sale to a third-party. In In re KB Toys, Inc., No. 13-1197 (3d Cir. Nov.