Skip to main content
Enter a keyword
  • Login
  • Home

    Main navigation

    Menu
    • US Law
      • Chapter 15 Cases
    • Regions
      • Africa
      • Asia Pacific
      • Europe
      • North Africa/Middle East
      • North America
      • South America
    • Headlines
    • Education Resources
      • ABI Committee Articles
      • ABI Journal Articles
      • Covid 19
      • Conferences and Webinars
      • Newsletters
      • Publications
    • Events
    • Firm Articles
    • About Us
      • ABI International Board Committee
      • ABI International Member Committee Leadership
    • Join
    Can second lien lenders be heard in connection with a 363 sale? The answer in Boston Generating is a resounding “yes.”
    2010-11-30

    Years ago, second lien lenders adhered to the truism about children -- they were seen but not heard. As our children have grown more vocal in recent years, so too have second lien lenders. A spate of recent bankruptcy cases demonstrate that second lien lenders have been both seen and heard at many critical junctures in the chapter 11 timeline -- at the sale of the debtor’s assets under section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code,1 in seeking the appointment of an examiner,2 when voting on a chapter 11 plan,3 and in connection with the confirmation hearing.4

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Richards Kibbe & Orbe LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Limited liability company, Debt, Liquidation, Secured loan, Title 11 of the US Code, US District Court for the Southern District of New York
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Richards Kibbe & Orbe LLP
    A skilled examiner can make all the difference
    2010-11-29

    The U.S. Bankruptcy Code provides for the appointment of a bankruptcy examiner to investigate the debtor with respect to allegations of fraud, dishonesty, incompetence, misconduct or mismanagement. The right examiner, with a clearly defined mission, will have a major influence on the bankruptcy process. The difference between a successful financial restructuring or liquidation-resulting in substantial recoveries for the key constituencies-and a time-consuming (and asset-consuming) meltdown, can depend on the approach of the examiner and the examiner's support team.

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, White Collar Crime, Wiley Rein LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Unsecured debt, Fraud, Debt, Liquidation, Leveraged buyout, US Department of Justice, Lehman Brothers, Enron, Trustee, Delaware Supreme Court, United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for District of Delaware, US District Court for the Southern District of New York
    Authors:
    H. Jason Gold , Rebecca L. Saitta
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Wiley Rein LLP
    Fiduciary duty not a defense to breach of exclusivity provision
    2010-11-29

    The Delaware Court of Chancery has held the seller in an asset purchase transaction liable for breach of an exclusivity provision in the subject asset purchase agreement, dismissing the seller's argument that the fiduciary duties owed by management to creditors negate the contractual exclusivity provision.

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Corporate Finance/M&A, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Herrick Feinstein LLP, Breach of contract, Fiduciary, Limited liability company, Debt, Solicitation, Refinancing, Delaware Court of Chancery, Court of equity
    Authors:
    Edward Stevenson , Irwin Kishner
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Herrick Feinstein LLP
    During hearing to consider Ambac’s rehabilitation plan, insurance regulator reveals that liquidation of the bond insurer was considered
    2010-11-23

    As we first covered here, Ambac Financial Group Inc., the parent of the ailing Wisconsin-domiciled bond insurer Ambac Assurance Corp., filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy relief with United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York on November 8, 2010.

    Filed under:
    USA, Wisconsin, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Litigation, Locke Lord LLP, Bond (finance), Bankruptcy, Debt, Asset-backed security, Liquidation, Portfolio (finance), Default (finance), Mortgage-backed security, Municipal bond, United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    Victoria Anderson , Jeanne Kohler
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Locke Lord LLP
    The Donald Trumps Icahn - intercreditor agreement restrictions on junior lenders not controlling in consideration of approval of nonconsensual reorganization plan
    2010-12-01

    In the Matter of TCI 2 Holdings, LLC, 428 B.R. 117 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2010)

    CASE SNAPSHOT

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Reed Smith LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Unsecured debt, Interest, Consideration, Debt, Casino, Leverage (finance), United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    Brian M. Schenker
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Reed Smith LLP
    Creditors of insolvent subsidiaries may bring derivative actions against parent company’s officers and directors for breach of fiduciary duties
    2010-12-01

    Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of TOUSA, Inc. v. Technical Olympic, S.A. (In re TOUSA, Inc.), 2010 WL 3835829 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2010)

    CASE SNAPSHOT

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Reed Smith LLP, Bankruptcy, Shareholder, Unsecured debt, Security (finance), Breach of contract, Fiduciary, Board of directors, Debt, Standing (law), Involuntary dismissal, Stakeholder (corporate), Business judgement rule, Subsidiary, Parent company, United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    Brian M. Schenker
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Reed Smith LLP
    Bankruptcy court (mostly) dismisses complaint against pre-petition lenders based on alleged inequitable conduct
    2010-12-01

    Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v Credit Suisse (In re Champion Enterprises, Inc.), 2010 WL 3522132 (Bankr. D. Del. 2010)

    CASE SNAPSHOT

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Reed Smith LLP, Contractual term, Bankruptcy, Credit (finance), Unsecured debt, Breach of contract, Debt, Estoppel, Unjust enrichment, Default (finance), Line of credit, Credit Suisse, Title 11 of the US Code, United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    Aaron B. Chapin
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Reed Smith LLP
    A perfect storm: retailers in bankruptcy in the post-BAPCPA economic downturn - part II
    2010-12-03

    In the first part of this article, we considered the effect of section 365(d)(4) and other Bankruptcy Code sections on retailer debtors and their respective landlords, as well as on how retailer debtors can utilize the holiday sales season to implement a successful reorganization.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP, Bankruptcy, Retail, Debtor, Debt, Liquidation, Title 11 of the US Code, United States bankruptcy court, Seventh Circuit, US District Court for Northern District of Texas
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
    The challenges for secured creditors in insurance insolvency: when having a secured claim may not guarantee payment
    2010-12-02

    In the case of banking institutions dealing with the unique world of insurance insolvency, the results may not be as dramatic as in other cultural clashes, but they can be equally confused. This is because insurance insolvency operates in its own separate world, where the usual rules of bankruptcy do not apply and where, without appropriate safeguards, having a secured claim may not guarantee repayment. For banks and other secured creditors, lending to insurance companies is governed by a separate set of rules to which careful attention must be paid.

    Filed under:
    USA, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Locke Lord LLP, Bankruptcy, Unsecured debt, Security (finance), Audit, Debt, Liability (financial accounting), Liquidation, Investment funds
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Locke Lord LLP
    A proposed plan’s voting stock allocation causes an incurable change-of-control breach and impermissible reinstatement of secured debt
    2010-12-01

    In re Young Broadcasting, Inc., et al., 430 B.R. 99 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2010)

    CASE SNAPSHOT

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Reed Smith LLP, Share (finance), Shareholder, Credit (finance), Debtor, Unsecured debt, Breach of contract, Board of directors, Interest, Debt, Voting, Default (finance), Secured loan, Pro rata, US District Court for the Southern District of New York
    Authors:
    Ann E. Pille
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Reed Smith LLP

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 108
    • Page 109
    • Page 110
    • Page 111
    • Current page 112
    • Page 113
    • Page 114
    • Page 115
    • Page 116
    • …
    • Next page ››
    • Last page Last »
    Home

    Quick Links

    • US Law
    • Headlines
    • Firm Articles
    • Board Committee
    • Member Committee
    • Join
    • Contact Us

    Resources

    • ABI Committee Articles
    • ABI Journal Articles
    • Conferences & Webinars
    • Covid-19
    • Newsletters
    • Publications

    Regions

    • Africa
    • Asia Pacific
    • Europe
    • North Africa/Middle East
    • North America
    • South America

    © 2025 Global Insolvency, All Rights Reserved

    Joining the American Bankruptcy Institute as an international member will provide you with the following benefits at a discounted price:

    • Full access to the Global Insolvency website, containing the latest worldwide insolvency news, a variety of useful information on US Bankruptcy law including Chapter 15, thousands of articles from leading experts and conference materials.
    • The resources of the diverse community of United States bankruptcy professionals who share common business and educational goals.
    • A central resource for networking, as well as insolvency research and education (articles, newsletters, publications, ABI Journal articles, and access to recorded conference presentation and webinars).

    Join now or Try us out for 30 days