Although 2011 saw major decisions concerning many facets of bankruptcy law, perhaps no area of bankruptcy law drew as many high-profile decisions as the standards for confirming a chapter 11 plan of reorganization. We draw your attention to three particularly important 2011 decisions that are likely to heavily influence the contours of many future chapter 11 plans.
Designating Votes Not Cast in Good Faith
On February 10, 2012, Judge Sean H. Lane of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York issued a ruling in a Chapter 15 bankruptcy proceeding where The Containership Company (TCC) is the debtor. Numerous shippers in the proceeding requested that the Bankruptcy Court defer to the Federal Maritime Commission with respect to the shippers' claims that TCC violated the Shipping Act of 1984.
On December 1, 2011, critical changes to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure took effect. Among the changes, which impact all creditors, are amendments altering the information required on a proof of claim filed in a bankruptcy court. Bankruptcy Rule 3001 was substantially changed to require, among other information: (i) an itemized statement of the amount of interest, fees, expenses or other charges incurred before the bankruptcy petition was filed, if a claim includes the aforementioned fees and expenses; (ii) a statement of the amount necessary to cure any default as of
Introduction
On February 10th, electricity operator LSP Energy LP ("LSP") filed chapter 11 petitions for bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. As stated in court filings, LSP owns and operates an electricity plant located in Batesville, Mississippi. Aside from its gas-fired electric generation facility, LSP's assets consist primarily of 58 acres of land in which it operates its facility. See Declaration of LSP's President in Support of First Day Motions (the "Declaration" or "Decl.").
USDC S.D. California, February 10, 2012
The healthcare industry was ailing in 2011. There were 88 publicly traded companies that filed for Chapter 11 relief in 2011, and of that amount, approximately 11 companies were in the healthcare industry. The healthcare industry led the group, with telecommunications and energy tied for second place (nine filings in each industry). The healthcare industry has faced many challenges over the years. For starters, hospitals are not always paid for their services.
CENTRAL STATES, SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST AREAS PENSION FUND v. SCOFBP (December 27, 2011)
Bankruptcy Rule changes, effective December 1, 2011, require mortgage holders and servicers to include additional documentation supporting proofs of claim filed in individual debtor cases. Mortgage holders and servicers must follow these rules or face sanctions and potential loss of the right to present the omitted documentation as evidence in subsequent proceedings.
In its recent decision in Meruelo Maddux Properties, Inc.,1 the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that an entity that meets the definition of a “single real estate” debtor under the Bankruptcy Code may not escape the consequences of such designation simply because it is a subsidiary of a group of companies with integrated and intertwined relationships among them. The decision may provide powerful rights not only to lenders to such entities in general, but could significantly enhance the rights of creditors of real estate owning single purpose entities.
In an earlier discussion on preference claims, we highlighted an increasingly common form of litigation in the bankruptcy courts that arises out of commercial bankruptcies: the preference action. We examined the policy underlying preference actions and the elements that give rise to a prima facie preference claim. We will now discuss some potential defenses to a preference claim and how a trade creditor can prepare itself to respond to a preference claim.