First Circuit Clarifies That When Determining The Value of Legal Claims as Collateral, a “Gallimaufry” of Factors Must Be Addressed to Meet Burden of Proof

The Bottom Line

In Wheeling & Lake Erie Ry. Co. v. Keach (In re Montreal, Me. & Atl. Ry.), No. 19-1894 (1st Cir. Apr. 9, 2020), the First Circuit held that when determining the value of legal claims as collateral, the party with the burden of proof must establish the likely validity of the claim and the likelihood of recovery — demonstrating possible damages alone does not suffice.

What Happened?

Background

Filed under:
USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Burden of proof, Title 11 of the US Code, First Circuit
Authors:
David E. Blabey, Jr
Location:
USA
Firm:
Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
Abeinsa holding opinion - Motion for relief from stay granted

Summary

Filed under:
USA, Arbitration & ADR, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fox Rothschild LLP, Bankruptcy, Burden of proof
Location:
USA
Firm:
Fox Rothschild LLP
First Circuit Clarifies That When Determining The Value of Legal Claims as Collateral, a “Gallimaufry” of Factors Must Be Addressed to Meet Burden of Proof

The Bottom Line

In Wheeling & Lake Erie Ry. Co. v. Keach (In re Montreal, Me. & Atl. Ry.), No. 19-1894 (1st Cir. Apr. 9, 2020), the First Circuit held that when determining the value of legal claims as collateral, the party with the burden of proof must establish the likely validity of the claim and the likelihood of recovery — demonstrating possible damages alone does not suffice.

What Happened?

Background

Filed under:
USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Burden of proof, Title 11 of the US Code, First Circuit
Authors:
David E. Blabey, Jr
Location:
USA
Firm:
Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP