Alice Belisle Eaton and Billy Clareman Discuss Latest Restructuring

Developments at PLI Event

Practising Law Institute’s “Recent Developments in Distressed Debt, Restructurings,

and Workouts 2024” featured restructuring partner Alice Belisle Eaton and

litigation partner Billy Clareman. Co-chair Alice delivered opening remarks and

spoke on “Market Update: Distressed Debt and Restructurings,” “Corporate

Governance, Officer and Director Risks and Claims in Distressed Situations” and

There will also be continued consequences arising out of the ongoing downturn in the economy. In the four quarters ending Q3 2023, the construction industry reported 4,276 cases of insolvency to the Insolvency Service, equating to 18% of all insolvencies reported (when an industry was recorded) during this period.

Election of Joe Graham to Partner

Joe Graham was elected partner in the New York office. This year, Joe played a leading role in the chapter 11 cases of Avaya, Benefytt and Diamond Sports. He regularly advises on out-of-court restructurings, bankruptcy litigation and distressed investments. Joe earned his J.D., magna cum laude, and his B.A. from the University of Notre Dame.

Kelley Cornish Inducted into “M&A Advisor Hall of Fame”

October found relief for both non-executive director’s and the D&O insurance market as the Carillion non-executive director 'test case' was abandoned the day before trial.

In the November 2023 edition of the Restructuring Department Bulletin, we highlight recent decisions and developments impacting the restructuring arena and share the latest news on the Paul, Weiss Restructuring Department.

» read the bulletin

In the October 2023 edition of the Restructuring Department Bulletin, we highlight recent decisions and developments impacting the restructuring arena and share the latest news on the Paul, Weiss Restructuring Department.

» read the bulletin

In Denaxe Limited v Cooper & Rubin, the Court of Appeal has recently considered the important issue of immunity from suit against a party who has previously sought the Court’s approval for a particular course of action. This is commonly utilised by trustees (under CPR 64) and insolvency practitioners (for example under CPR 69 and Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986) when faced with difficult questions concerning entitlements and distributions to different classes of beneficiary or creditor.

In the latest issue of the Restructuring Department Bulletin, we highlight the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision holding that Section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code is not jurisdictional. We also discuss two Bankruptcy Court decisions from the Southern District of New York, one which held that the “knowledge exception” to Section 546(e)’s safe harbor defense was sufficiently pled to survive dismissal, and the other which found that service of a discovery subpoena on the foreign debtor’s founders via Twitter was adequate.

On April 19, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in MOAC Mall Holdings LLC v. Transform Holdco LLC that Section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code is not jurisdictional. The decision requires parties timely to invoke that provision, or else risk forfeiting its protections. The decision also continues the Supreme Court’s trend of interpreting statutes to be non-jurisdictional (and thus waivable or forfeitable) in the absence of a clear congressional statement to the contrary.

Background

Creditor duty

In BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA the Supreme Court considered the issue of the so-called ‘creditor duty’.