Seyfarth Synopsis: A bankruptcy court overseeing an employer’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding allowed the employer to pay certain unsecured creditors before paying Worker Adjustment And Retraining Notification Act (“WARN”) creditors – workers who had sued the company – monies owed pursuant to a judgment, even though the bulk of the WARN monies owed were for back wages that hold priority over other unsecured claims under the Bankruptcy Code.
Trust Indenture Act Section 316(b) Limited to Actual Amendments to An Indenture’s Core Terms
The Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA) was passed by Congress in 1930 to protect agricultural produce suppliers from unscrupulous vendors who refused to pay the suppliers for their goods.
Decision clarifies standards for priority treatment under section 507(a)(7); important implications in retail bankruptcy cases for debtors, creditors - and consumers
Overview
On March 2, 2016, Sports Authority, Inc. (“Sports Authority”) and six of its affiliates filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in Delaware. The filing will significantly impact Sports Authority’s landlords and trade creditors. In a press release, Sports Authority stated that it intends to close or sell approximately 140 locations and two distribution centers in the coming months. The company is also seeking $595 million in post-bankruptcy financing to continue operations. Sports Authority is a sporting goods retailer with 463 locations in 41 states and Puerto Rico.
On January 15, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) held in In re Trump Entertainment Resorts that section 1113 of the Bankruptcy Code permits a debtor to reject an expired collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”).
Employers scored a big victory in In re Trump Entertainment Resorts, a case of first impression in the Third Circuit, which held that a debtor-employer can terminate their obligations under an expired Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and implement the terms of a final offer.
Click here to view image.
In Quadrant Structured Products Company, Ltd. v. Vertin (Oct. 20, 2015), the Delaware Court of Chancery, in a post-trial decision, rejected Quadrant’s challenges to transactions by Athilon Capital Corp., with Athilon’s sole stockholder (private equity firm Merced), after Athilon had returned to solvency following a long period of insolvency. Merced held all of Athilon’s equity and all of its junior notes; and both Quadrant and Merced held the company’s publicly traded senior notes.
On May 21, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) affirmed the order of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. CIT Group/Business Credit Inc. (In re Jevic Holding Corp.) approving a settlement and dismissal of a chapter 11 case by way of a “structured dismissal.” A structured dismissal is, simply, the dismissal of the bankruptcy case preceded by other orders, such as an order approving a settlement or granting releases, which survive dismissal of the case.