On June 1, 2022, Charlotte N.C.-based GT Real Estate Holdings, LLC, the company Carolina Panthers owner David Tepper created specifically for the Panthers new headquarters project in Rock Hill, S.C., filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for District of Delaware after the deal to develop the new facility collapsed (Case No. 22-10505).
On June 1, 2022, California-based Zosano Pharma Corporation, a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company enabling the systemic administration of therapeutics and other bioactive molecules to patients using a proprietary transdermal microneedle patch system, filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for District of Delaware (Case No. 22-10506).
On June 1, 2022, Houston-based petrochemical manufacturer TPC Group Inc., and several affiliates filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for District of Delaware to pursue a “prearranged” financial restructuring (Case No. 22-10493).
This is reality:
- Small businesses reorganize, all the time, under Subchapter V;
- Farmers reorganize, all the time, under Chapter 12; and
- Large businesses reorganize, all the time, under regular Chapter 11.
That’s because all of those three types of debtors have bankruptcy reorganization processes designed specifically for them.
Middle Market Debtors
What the heck does this mean:
“(1) Debtor.—The term ‘debtor’— . . . (B) does not include— . . . (Iii) any debtor that is an affiliate of an issuer, as defined in section 3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c)”
—from Subchapter V’s eligibility statute, § 1182 (emphasis added).
Since the inception of Subchapter V, I’ve been trying to figure that meaning out.
Here’s the progression of thinking:
How are private practice mediators compensated in a bankruptcy case—procedurally?
We have a new court order providing guidance on how such procedures can work.
The new guidance is from Sears Holding Corp. v. Lampert (In re Sears Holdings Corp.), Adv. Pro. No. 19-08250, SDNY Bankruptcy Court.
Mediation Order
“Trillions of dollars”: That’s the amount of civil penalty claims a group of 40 States are asserting against Johnson & Johnson for consumer protection law violations. [Fn. 1]
Such civil penalty claims:
Johnson & Johnson (“J&J”) sold baby powder for decades.
Today, J&J is facing tens of thousands of lawsuits alleging that its baby powder causes cancer. And the number of new cancer claimants is increasing daily—with many thousands yet to be identified over decades to come.
So, J&J turns to bankruptcy to address this litigation threat, to protect future claimants, and to protect the going concern value of its global operations. [Fn. 1]
Johnson & Johnson and its affiliates (“J&J”) have been selling baby powder for decades.
Along the way, studies began showing that talc in J&J’s baby powder can cause ovarian cancer and mesothelioma. So, since 2016, over 38,000 lawsuits have been filed against J&J contending its baby powder talc causes cancer.
In July of 2018, the talc litigation against J&J built-up serious steam when a jury awarded 22 women a $4.69 billion (yes, with a “b”) verdict against J&J—an appellate court reduced the verdict to $2.25 billion.
On May 10, 2022, Talen Energy Supply, LLC, a Texas-based independent power producer founded in 2015, filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (Case No. 22-90054).