You just got your committee approvals for a new relation. It is a borrower you have been after for some time. Approvals are fairly standard and call for a secured credit facility with a priority all business asset lien.
The borrower is moving nearly all of its accounts to your bank for cash management too. But the borrower claims he needs to keep one account at a mutual since he is holding his breath that there will be demutualization and he will hit it big with stock redemption. You do not have the heart to crush his retirement dreams so you let him keep that other account.
(7th Cir. Apr. 14, 2016)
The Seventh Circuit applies Wisconsin state law and holds that a mortgage can attach a lien to a vendor’s interest in a real estate contract and that the lender perfected the lien by recording in the county land records rather than filing a UCC-1 financing statement. The trustee is unable to avoid the lien. Opinion below.
Judge: Hamilton
Attorneys for Trustee: Michael F. Dubis, Christopher R. Schultz
Attorneys for Appellees: Ruffi Law Offices, Sara Lynn Ruffi, Lund Law Office, Brad M. Lund
IRS Clarifies That a Typical “Bad Boy Guarantee” Will Not Cause an Otherwise Nonrecourse Financing to Be Treated as Recourse
On April 15, 2016, the IRS released a generic legal advice memorandum (the “GLAM”)1 providing an important and helpful clarification of the treatment of a guarantee of a partnership nonrecourse liability when the guarantee is conditioned on certain typical “nonrecourse carve-out” events (commonly referred to as “bad boy guarantees”).
In our previous update concerning OW Bunker litigation in the United States, we discussed orders issued by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana in which the court held that a physical supplier of bunkers did not have an enforceable maritime lien against a vessel. Valero Marketing and Supply Co. v. M/V ALMI SUN, No. 14 Civ. 2712 (NJB) (E.D. La. decided Dec. 28, 2015 and Feb.
Bankruptcy is all about the debtor’s assets, specifically how many and who gets them. The reason that many bankruptcy cases are contentious is that the parties often disagree about the amount of assets available for distribution to creditors, as well as how the assets should be divvied up.
In In re Zair, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49032 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 12, 2016), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York became the latest to take sides on the emerging issue of “forced vesting” through a chapter 13 plan. After analyzing Bankruptcy Code §§ 1322(b)(9) and 1325(a)(5), the court concluded that a chapter 13 debtor could not, through a chapter 13 plan, force a mortgagee to take title to the mortgage collateral.
Background
The IRS issued a Memorandum on April 15, 2016 clarifying the treatment of nonrecourse debt subject to certain “bad boy” guarantees. The Memorandum takes a position contrary to the recent Chief Counsel Advice (CCA 201606027) and is more in keeping with the general view of the real estate industry.
(Bankr. E.D. Ky. Apr. 15, 2016)
The bankruptcy court dismisses the plaintiff’s complaint because it failed to state a claim. The complaint was based on a factual assertion that the plaintiff’s predecessor had an interest in certain bank account funds. However, the prior 11 U.S.C. § 363 sale order and confirmation order adjudicated otherwise. Thus, the claims were barred by the doctrine of res judicata. Opinion below.
Judge: Wise
Attorneys for Plaintiff: Philip G. Fairbanks, M. Austin Mehr, John M. Simms
For secured lenders, a consumer debtor’s chapter 13 bankruptcy filing can be a mixed bag.
GAO has issued a report which noted the FDIC and Federal Reserve have developed separate but similar review processes for determining whether a resolution plan, often referred to as a “living will,” is “not credible” or would not facilitate a company’s orderly resolution under the Bankruptcy Code.