Readers may remember the dramatic restructuring of the GM and Chrysler dealer networks as part of the bankruptcy proceedings for each auto maker in 2009. The state auto dealer franchise statutes and their protection against dealer terminations were summarily preempted by the bankruptcy proceedings and the pre-condition of dealer network reduction for the necessary loans from the federal government to the debtors in possession. Dealers challenged this action in the Court of Claims, and by an April 7, 2014 decision in A&D Auto Sales, Inc. et al. v.
A federal district court has held that a bankruptcy trustee’s action to compel payment of crop insurance proceeds is time-barred by virtue of the Federal Crop Insurance Act (FCIA) and the insurance policies’ arbitration provisions. The trustee brought the action against the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC), as reinsurer, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Risk Management Agency (RMA) seeking payment of policy proceeds for the benefit of the debtor’s estate.
In re: Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, No. 12-12321 (MG) (S.D.N.Y. Bankr., April 10, 2014): As part of the bankruptcy proceedings involving Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York struck Dewey’s defenses to claims brought by its former employees under the federal and New York State WARN Acts. On May 10 and May 14, 2012, Dewey provided letters to its employees warning that their employment could be terminated due to the firm’s financial condition.
Bankruptcy practitioners are anxiously awaiting a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that will determine whether a party can waive its right to trial before an Article III tribunal.
Reversing a decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that severance payments to employees who were involuntarily terminated as part of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy were taxable wages subject to Social Security and Medicare (FICA) taxes. The decision disappointed many who had hoped the court would uphold the earlier appeals court ruling that certain severance payments should be exempt from FICA taxes as supplemental unemployment compensation benefits (SUBs).
After the housing market collapse, many cities and towns fell on hard times and have yet to recover. In quite a few communities, housing prices remain low, municipal debt levels are unsustainable, and attempts to raise revenue have been rejected by voters—who are often cash-strapped themselves. Bankruptcy offers breathing room, political cover for tough decisions, and the chance to renegotiate collective bargaining agreements and restructure debt. The bankruptcy process is frequently used by businesses and individuals seeking a “fresh start.” Why don’t more dist
Interest in cryptocurrencies is growing, even after Mt. Gox, formerly the largest international bitcoin exchange, filed for bankruptcy in Japan following $473 million in losses.
Four decades ago, when I began my legal career, bankruptcy sales were held in low regard. They were regarded, and often referred to, as “fire sales” that were almost certain to attract no interested parties other than bottom feeding liquidators seeking to pay only a fraction of the value of the marketed assets. For this reason, potential sellers steered clear of bankruptcy.
Chances are if you are a provider of goods or services and do business pursuant to some form of a short-term or long-term credit arrangement that you have received correspondence from a bankruptcy Trustee or a Chapter 11 debtor demanding money on the basis of an alleged “preference.” Perhaps some of you have even been served with a formal complaint demanding the same. If so, then this article is meant to take some of the mystery out of preferences and to offer some advice as to what to do when you receive such a correspondence.
WHAT IS A PREFERENCE?
On April 17, 2014, the United States Bankruptcy Judge Sean H. Lane issued an opinion in the Waterford Wedgwood bankruptcy discussing at length one of the defenses available to preference defendants. The opinion turns upon the scope of “ordinary business terms,” the objective prong of the ordinary course of business defense.