Fulltext Search
For Creditors, Written Representation Is The Best Evidence

On June 4, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Lamar Archer & Cofrin LLP v. Appling,[1] resolving a circuit split on the issue of whether a debtor’s statement about a single asset constitutes “a statement respecting the debtor’s financial condition” for the purposes of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2).

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Tax, White Collar Crime, Duane Morris LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split on Issue of Whether Statement About a Single Asset Is One Respecting Debtor's Financial Condition

Alerts and Updates

The Supreme Court’s opinion is significant because it will encourage creditors to rely on written, rather than oral, statements of debtors as to both their assets and overall financial status, which are better evidence in a nondischargeability case.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Tax, Duane Morris LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
The Ninth Circuit Vacates Bankruptcy Court’s Designation Order, Holding That Purchasing a Subset of Available Claims to Block a Plan, Absent An Ulterior Motive, Does Not Constitute Bad Faith

Summary

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Ninth Circuit
Connecticut Bankruptcy Court Holds That Trademark Licensee Does Not Automatically Lose the Right to Use Trademarks When Debtor-Licensor Rejects License, Siding with Seventh Circuit in Circuit Split

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut recently examined a question at the heart of an existing circuit split regarding the consequences of trademark license rejection in bankruptcy: can a trademark licensee retain the use of a licensed trademark post-rejection? In re SIMA International, Inc., 2018 WL 2293705 (Bankr. D. Conn. May 17, 2018).

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Trademarks, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Prepetition Setoff Not an 'Improvement in Position' Under Bankruptcy Code

In a recent decision out of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Virginia, a court analyzed the effect of a setoff effectuated between two governmental units in the 90 days prior to the filing of a husband and wife’s bankruptcy case. In Hurt v. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (In re Hurt), 579 B.R. 765 (Bankr. W.D. Va. 2017), the court addressed competing motions for summary judgment filed by the debtors, on the one hand, and the U.S.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Tax, Duane Morris LLP
Will the Scope of US Trustee’s Policy on Cannabis-Related Bankruptcy Filings be Limited?

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit revived a chapter 13 debtor’s bankruptcy case holding that the bankruptcy court below made no specific finding that the debtor violated the Controlled Substance Act (“CSA”) to support dismissal of the case.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Duane Morris LLP, US Department of Justice, United States bankruptcy court
Supreme Court Holds That Presence of Financial Conduits Does Not Trigger “Safe Harbor” Protection for Securities-Related Transfers Under Section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code

On February 27, 2018, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split regarding the proper application of the safe harbor set forth in section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code, a provision that prohibits the avoidance of a transfer if the transfer was made in connection with a securities contract and made by or to (or for the benefit of) certain qualified entities, including a financial institution.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Supreme Court of the United States
Ninth Circuit Holds That Joint Plan Covering Multiple Debtors Must Be Approved by Only One Impaired Class Per Plan, Not One Impaired Class Per Debtor

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that section 1129(a)(10) of the Bankruptcy Code – a provision which, in effect, prohibits confirmation of a plan unless the plan has been accepted by at least one impaired class of claims – applies on “per plan” rather than a “per debtor” basis, even when the plan at issue covers multiple debtors. In re Transwest Resort Properties, Inc., 2018 WL 615431 (9th Cir. Jan. 25, 2018). The Court is the first circuit court to address the issue.

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Ninth Circuit
First Circuit Rejects Seventh Circuit’s Approach to Rejection of Trademark Licenses: Licensees Retain No Post-Rejection Trademark Rights

In one of the first decisions issued this year by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, the court addressed an issue of first impression. In Mission Products Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, n/k/a Old Cold LLC, No. 16-9016 (1st Cir. Jan. 12, 2018), the First Circuit held that the omission of trademarks from the definition of “intellectual property” in Section 101(35A) of the Bankruptcy Code, as incorporated by Section 365(n), leaves a trademark licensee with nothing more than a claim for damages upon the rejection of its license under Section 365(a).

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Trademarks, Duane Morris LLP, United States bankruptcy court, Seventh Circuit, First Circuit
Delaware Bankruptcy Court Affirms Its Constitutional Authority to Approve Nonconsensual Releases

Some six years after the United States Supreme Court decided Stern v. Marshall, courts continue to grapple with the decision’s meaning and how much it curtails the exercise of bankruptcy court jurisdiction.[1] The U.S.

USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP