There is a lesson for all debtor attorneys in the Chapter 7 case of In re Aquilino.[Fn. 1]
The moral of the In re Aquilino story is this:
- a little carelessness in describing and disclosing bankruptcy fees in a Chapter 7 case can create big problems.
Fee Agreements & Disclosures
Here is the winding path of fee agreement descriptions and disclosures, between the Debtors and their attorneys, in the In re Aquilino Chapter 7 case:
对于陷入困境的企业,可以通过与债权人之间以协议的方式,对企业进行债务调整和资产重构,以实现企业复兴和债务清偿。而债务重组中债权人最关注的即是如何有效地实现债权退出,不同类型的债权人、不同的债权情况所涉的债权人诉求均可能存在差异,提供多样化的债权退出路径可以更有效地促进困境企业债务重组成功。根据实践经验,我们总结出多种卓有成效的债权退出路径,包括但不限于直接参与留债重组、债权转股权、债权转让、资产证券化等等。
一、直接参与留债重组
对于债务人陷入流动性危机,但本身资质良好,给予一定的时间可度过困境恢复清偿能力的,债权人往往愿意与债务人就还款金额、还款方式、还款时间等债权债务问题达成新的协议,通过优化该类企业的资产负债结构、盘活企业不良资产,帮助企业渡过财务危机,最终实现债权受偿。
在留债重组的方式下,债权人亦可以有多种具体的债权退出路径,包括但不限于资产出售及资产盘活偿债、以资产或信托受益权等财产权抵债、以企业经营收益现金受偿、企业恢复良性负债率后融资还债等等。特殊情况下,如相关债权涉及企业继续经营所必需,还可以采取“类共益债”的形式,由全体债权人表决引入投资人协助原债权人退出。
(一)以部分资产出售偿债退出
On April 23, 2024, the American Bankruptcy Institute’s Subchapter V Task Force issued its Final Report.
This article is the second in a series summarizing and condensing the Task Force’s Final Report into “a nutshell.” The subject of this article is:
- whether future rents should be included in the debt cap calculation for Subchapter V eligibility.[Fn. 1]
Recommendation
Delaware’s Court of Chancery has no subject matter jurisdiction over an assignment for benefit of creditors proceeding when the debtor/assignor is an Illinois corporation with no assets or operations in Delaware, even when its ABC assignee/trustee is from Delaware.
That’s the decision of Delaware’s Court of Chancery in In re Vernon Hills Serv. Co., 2024 Del. Ch., C.A. No. 2021-0783 (issued March 28, 2024).
Facts
On April 23, 2024, the American Bankruptcy Institute’s Subchapter V Task Force issued its Final Report.
This article is the first in a series that summarizes and condenses the Task Force’s Final Report into “a nutshell.” This article:
- provides background information and data on Subchapter V.[Fn. 1]
Overall
Debtor’s Chapter 11 counsel cannot be compensated for services performed after a trustee is appointed and the debtor removed from possession.
- That’s the rule of law in the Fifth Circuit and in a not-for-publication decision of the Ninth Circuit’s Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, based on a U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
So . . . the question is, what about Subchapter V? Does that same no-compensation rule apply in Subchapter V when the debtor is removed from possession?
Ninth Circuit BAP Opinion
Bankruptcies with large tort claims are common:
- some involve a limited number of claimants (e.g., a drunk driver hits a bus or a restaurant serves bad food one evening); and
- others have large numbers of claimants, some of whom won’t even be known for at least another decade (e.g., asbestos cases).
Often in tort bankruptcies, the total amount of claims overwhelms the debtor’s ability to pay: i.e., existing assets, insurance coverages and projected future income streams are, simply, insufficient.
具有高风险高收益特征的私募基金自诞生以来吸引了无数投资者,它帮助很多投资者在短期内取得了可观的收益,但高收益必然伴随着高风险。在私募基金未取得理想的收益或甚至发生亏损后,部分投资者以基金管理人在募集、投资、投后管理、清算等过程中未适当履职为由,通过向监管部门投诉、提起诉讼或仲裁等方式要求基金管理人承担赔偿责任的案例比比皆是,对基金管理人的财务状况及后续展业造成了严重的不利影响。
本文结合清算过程中基金管理人可能出现的未适当履职及由此需承担的赔偿责任进行分析,以期引起基金管理人对基金清算工作的高度重视,避免自身及从业人员的赔偿责任。
一、延迟、怠于履行清算义务的赔偿责任
1. 未适当履职的情形

The opinion is Bruce v. Citigroup Inc., Case No. 22-1000, decided August 2, 2023, by the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
The opinion addresses this question:
You don’t see this very often: a dispute over the confidentiality of mediation communications.
But such a dispute recently happened in In re Barretts Minerals, Inc., Case No. 23-90794, Southern Texas Bankruptcy Court. And the result is this: mediation confidentiality remains alive and well.
In re Barretts Minerals is a mass-tort asbestos case. And Debtor is pursuing confirmation of a bankruptcy plan under § 524(6). Mediation efforts are in progress.