The District Court for the Southern District of New York in Lehman Brothers recently threw cold water on a growing body of cases that permit compensation of professional fees incurred by individual members of official committees of unsecured creditors.
As predicted, the court in Tokyo has ruled that Mt. Gox will be liquidated. An “Announcement of Commencement of Bankruptcy Proceedings” was posted overnight April 24 by the Japanese bankruptcy trustee Nobuaki Kobayashi on the Mt. Gox site to confirm that the company is officially in bankruptcy (liquidation) in Japan. The Announcement also includes a “Frequently Asked Questions” section to give a very high level overview of the liquidation process.
On April 16, Mt. Gox’s civil rehabilitation proceeding in Tokyo (something similar to a U.S. Chapter 11) was dismissed and the initial stages of a bankruptcy liquidation under Japanese law began. An Interim Administrator (Nobuaki Kobaysahi) has been named until the Japanese court decides whether the liquidation will begin and whether a different Administrator replaces the Interim Administrator. How this situation came to be is an interesting tale.
Mt. Gox filed a motion requesting the U.S. Bankruptcy Court’s approval of the form of the official notification of the May 6 recognition hearing as well as approving the service via email. The motion also seeks to establish a deadline of seven days before that hearing for any party to object to the request for recognition of the Japanese insolvency case. Additional notice would be provided by posting an approved form of notification on the Mt. Gox web site as well as at the Reddit.com site.
Tuesday evening, the Plaintiffs in the Illinois Class Action litigation filed motions with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Dallas asking that court to terminate the temporary stay it recently granted to Mt. Gox. They also asked that Robert Marie Mark Karpeles (the Foreign Representative for Mt. Gox) be ordered to provide testimony under oath in the United States regarding the Chapter 15 filing.
Introduction
The Illinois Supreme Court recently provided certainty to dissolving corporations with respect to the risk of facing a lawsuit even after it has long since dissolved. Illinois permits lawsuits against dissolved corporations for up to five years after the corporation has ceased to exist. The Supreme Court clarified that only those claims that have accrued prior to the corporation's dissolution (i.e., the injury occurred prior to dissolution) may be brought in that five-year period.
The 7th Circuit has again left a disappointed creditor with no recourse because of the creditor's failure to do basic investigation or take steps to protect itself. (On Command Video Corporation vs. Samuel J. Roti, Nos. 12-1351 and 12-1430, January 14, 2013). This case follows other cases in which the 7th Circuit has shown itself decidedly unfriendly to creditors who sought compensation through the courts in failed business ventures but could have, but failed, to prevent their unfortunate situation.
When being sued, corporate and individual defendants should always confirm that the plaintiff has not been previously discharged in bankruptcy and failed to disclose the claim in the proceeding as an asset of the bankruptcy estate. In Guay v. Burack, 677 F.3d 10 (1st Cir. 2012), the plaintiff brought numerous claims against various governmental entities, governmental officials and a police officer.
In a recent decision, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals was faced with a situation that is the bane of any commercial and business attorney. A legal document contained an error. But in this case, the error was so extreme and obvious that the court was willing to reform the document to correct the error, in the face of other cases where courts refused to let parties escape from their mistakes. In re: Equipment Acquisition Resources (7th Cir., No. 1103905 decided on August 9, 2012)