In Meridian Sunrise Village, LLC v. NB Distressed Debt Investment Fund Ltd., et al., No. 13-5503(W.D. Wash. Mar.
A recent decision out of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington will be of interest to both lenders and borrowers of loans that are expected to be traded. In Meridian Sunrise Village, LLC v.
A decision recently handed down by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington should be of interest to lenders and distressed debt purchasers. In Meridian Sunrise Village, LLC v. NB Distressed Debt Investment Fund Ltd. (In re Meridian Sunrise Village, LLC), 2014 BL 62646 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 6, 2014), a lender group had provided $75 million in financing to a company for the purpose of constructing a shopping center.
A recent decision by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington found that certain distressed debt funds were not “financial institutions” under the definition of “Eligible Assignee” in the applicable loan agreement and thus were not entitled to vote on the debtor’s chapter 11 plan of reorganization. The District Court decision affirmed a bankruptcy court decision enjoining loan assignments to the funds and recently denied the funds’ motion to vacate the decision.”1
Law360, New York (May 27, 2014, 4:11 PM ET) -- The Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act has many ramifications for secured lenders who provide financing to borrowers that own goods that fall within its scope, particularly in bankruptcy. Because PACA provides its beneficiaries — unpaid suppliers and sellers of perishable agricultural commodities and products — with superior rights over other creditors through the establishment of a trust, secured lenders must be careful not to rely on the standard language in bankruptcy orders that cleanse assets of liens.
Finds Bankruptcy Court to be Proper Forum for Claim Objection Despite Forum Selection Clauses in Investor Agreements
The Southern District of New York recently reiterated the critical difference between creditor claims and equity interests in the bankruptcy context. In a recent opinion arising out of the Arcapita Bank bankruptcy case, the Court was faced with an objection to a proof of claim filed by an investor, Captain Hani Alsohaibi, who characterized his right to recovery against the debtors as being based on a “corporate investment.”
Once again, those of us in the commercial finance world are reminded of the age-old adage caveat emptor. This time the warning is directed at hedge funds and other investors with a penchant for purchasing distressed debt from bank syndicates.
A recent decision from an Oregon bankruptcy court provides a cautionary tale for lenders attempting to “bankruptcy proof” their borrowers.
Both the Loan Syndications and Trading Association, Inc. (the “LSTA”) and the Loan Market Association (the “LMA”) publish the forms of documentation used by sophisticated financial entities involved in the trading of large corporate syndicated loans in the secondary trading market. The LSTA based in New York was founded in 1995. The LMA based in London was formed in 1996. Both the LSTA and LMA share the common aim of assisting in developing best practices and standard documentation to facilitate the growth and liquidity of efficient trading of syndicated corporate loans.
On April 28, in the wake of Mt. Gox’s Japanese rehabilitation proceeding having been converted to a liquidation proceeding, a proposal for selling and restarting the Mt. Gox exchange was submitted in the pending class action litigation in Illinois. The proposal was accepted by plaintiffs in the class action litigation before a class had even been certified.