HIGHLIGHTS:
HIGHLIGHTS:
In a case decided on March 28, 2018, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a maritime lien on a vessel for the "maintenance and cure" of an injured seaman was not subject to the "automatic stay" that generally arises as the result of a bankruptcy filing by the owner of the vessel. In the case entitled Barnes v. Sea Hawaii Rafting, LLC, 886 F.3d 758, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether the special rules invoked by maritime law trumped the rules and equitable principles set out in the Bankruptcy Code, or whether bankruptcy law triumphed.
The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued proposed amendments on June 26, 2013, to provide guidance about management's responsibilities in evaluating a company's going concern uncertainties in addition to the timing and content of related footnote disclosures. Even before a company’s liquidation is imminent, there may be uncertainties about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern and, therefore, about its going concern presumption (going concern uncertainties). Currently, there is no guidance in the U.S.
Earlier today, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued a decision vacating maritime attachments of a vessel on the grounds that the attachments were futile in view of the Vessel Owner's bankruptcy proceedings. In Evridiki Navigation v. The Sanko Steamship Co., Ltd., Civil No. JKB-12-1382 (ECF Doc. # 135)(D. Md. Jul. 27, 2012), a vessel had been attached in Baltimore, Maryland, by use of Rule B of the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty and Maritime Claims.