Will Congress Finally Act?

This is the fourth in a series of Alerts regarding the proposals made by the American Bankruptcy Institute Commission to Reform Chapter 11 Business Bankruptcies. We discuss here the Commission’s efforts to require that debtor’s management act in a more transparent fashion. For copies of this or any prior articles about the Commission, please contact any BakerHostetler bankruptcy attorney.

This is the fourth in a series of Alerts regarding the proposals made by the American Bankruptcy Institute Commission to Reform Chapter 11 Business Bankruptcies. We discuss here the Commission’s efforts to require that debtor’s management act in a more transparent fashion. For copies of this or any prior articles about the Commission, please contact any BakerHostetler bankruptcy attorney.

The latest turn in the ongoing Petters bankruptcy saga came on June 11, when U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Gregory Kishel issued a 46-page order examining 2012 amendments to the Minnesota Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (MUFTA).

This week, the Weil Bankruptcy Blog premieres a new series, “Lookback Period.”  In these entries, we will periodically review and summarize the hot topics on which we have been writing over the last couple of weeks.  We thought this might be an easy way on a summer Friday (or a rainy weekend) to catch up on what you might have missed in the Weil Bankruptcy Blog.

More Momentive, This Time From the District Court

Bankruptcies and restructurings involving partners and partnerships1 raise a number of unique tax issues. While the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) has provided guidance with respect to a number of these issues, a surprising number of unresolved issues remain. The first part of this outline summarizes the state of the law with respect to general tax issues that typically arise in connection with partner and partnership bankruptcies and restructurings. The balance of the outline discusses tax issues that arise under Subchapter K when troubled partnerships are reorganized. II.

This is the fifth post in our Bitcoin Bankruptcy series on the Weil Bankruptcy Blog.  We have concluded that a hypothetical U.S.-based bitcoin exchange likely would not constitute a stockbroker or a 

On June 29, 2015, Baha Mar Ltd, the development company behind a $3.5 billion Bahamian resort and its affiliated debtors, filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the U.S. District Court of Delaware.  Attached here is a copy of the petition.  Debtors offer the declaration of Thomas M. Dunlap in support of their first day pleadings.

The Supreme Court has not handled its recent major bankruptcy decisions well. The jurisdictional confusion engendered by its 2011 decision in Stern v.

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued its opinion in Baker Botts v. Asarco, holding that professionals retained in bankruptcy cases cannot receive compensation for the costs of defending their fee applications. Even if you aren’t a bankruptcy professional, there are two things to keep in mind about this opinion. First, it won’t stop us restructuring professionals from doing our jobs. Second, the reality of commercial bankruptcy practice is often at odds with the pure textual analysis favored by the Supreme Court.

In an opinion issued on June 1 in a case entitled Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett, the United States Supreme Court answered a question that has split lower courts since the Supreme Court decided Dewsnup v. Timm in 1992. The question answered in Caulkett was whether a debtor in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case can “strip off” a lien on the debtor’s property if the bankruptcy court determines that the lien is worthless, leaving the former secured creditor with an unsecured claim that can be discharged. The Supreme Court’s answer is no.