The University of Texas' 29th Annual Jay L. Westbrook Bankruptcy Conference November 19, 2010
Introduction
Earlier this month, the chapter 11 trustee (the "Trustee") in the DBSI bankruptcy began filing adversary actions seeking the avoidance and recovery of alleged fraudulent transfers. The Trustee filed the adversary actions against various defendants, some of whom the Trustee identifies as "John Doe 1 -10." This post will look briefly at the DBSI bankruptcy proceeding, why DBSI filed for bankruptcy, as well as some of the events that have transpired since the compnay filed for bankruptcy.
Background
When defaults spiked for loans underwritten by commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS), many Texas attorneys sought state court-appointed receivers for commercial real estate assets.
Placing a struggling property in receivership has long been a remedy available for lenders, but Texas' relatively expedited and inexpensive nonjudicial foreclosure process limited the remedy's practical value for traditional lenders.
On December 23, 2010, the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the 6th Circuit, upheld the Eastern District of Kentucky’s Bankruptcy Court’s order that post petition rents, revenues or other funds derived from leased real property is property of the estate under 11 U.S.C. §541 and can be used as cash collateral under 11 U.S.C. §363. However, post petition rents can be used as cash collateral only if the debtor can provide adequate protection for the use of those rents through an existing equity cushion in the property.
The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals1 recently issued an opinion of importance in bankruptcy cases involving commercial real estate as the debtor’s only asset, such as a shopping center or office building.
Anyone in the commercial real estate business can tell you that the past couple of years have seen a significant uptick in the number of commercial foreclosures and owner bankruptcies. While it does appear that the market is improving, we’re certainly not out of the woods. We are likely to see headlines declaring the latest big bankruptcy or foreclosure for a few more quarters. Sometimes lost in the headlines is the impact such issues have on the tenants in these commercial properties.
In the fallout of recent commercial mortgage-backed securities defaults, mortgage servicers have increasingly used receivership sales for commercial real estate assets, including last month’s sale of the Davis Building in downtown Dallas.
On March 28, 2012, the Minnesota Legislature gave final passage to HF 382, a comprehensive revision of Minnesota statutes governing receiverships and assignments for the benefit of creditors (ABCs) in the state. Following signature by the governor (which is expected), the new statutes will take effect on August 1, 2012. Sponsored by the Minnesota State Bar Association and its Business Law and Real Property Sections, the new statutes are the product of more than two years of work by a committee of Minnesota lawyers and receivers.
Receiverships
Introduction
We all know that many large commercial real estate loan transactions include “bad boy” guaranties from the principals of the borrower which spring into action upon the occurrence of certain events, like the filing of a bankruptcy petition. Some borrowers do not take these guaranties seriously since they think that they are in violation of public policy and/or constitute an unenforceable penalty.