On January 19, 2012, the Seventh Circuit in In re River East Plaza, LLC, (No. 11-3263), held in favor of a secured lender further strengthening the rights of secured creditors in bankruptcy cases.
The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the Court) recently granted a motion to dismiss a mezzanine borrower’s chapter 11 bankruptcy petition at the outset of the debtor’s case.1 In In re JER/Jameson Mezz Borrower II, LLC, The Court found that the debtor’s petition had been filed in bad faith because, among other things, a junior mezzanine lender had directed the debtor to file the petition with the intent of hindering a senior mezzanine lender’s foreclosure efforts and without any valid reorganization purpose.
The United States Supreme Court accepted the petition for certiorari on the Seventh Circuit decision in RadLAX Gateway Hotel, LLC v. Amalgamated Bank on December 12, 2011 and arguments will likely be heard by the Court in April 2012. This case presents the Supreme Court with the important issue of whether secured lenders are entitled to submit a credit bid, a bid not requiring actual transfer of payment, at the sale of their collateral in the Bankruptcy Court.
The Bottom Line:
The Bottom Line:
The Bottom Line:
Theresa V. Brown-Edwards, Ryan M. Murphy
In the last several months, there have been some significant legal developments that could impact acquisition finance. This article will survey some of the more notable ones.
In a case with implications for buyers of assets in a bankruptcy court-ordered sale under section 363(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York recently issued a decision limiting the ability of manufacturers that are debtors in a bankruptcy case to sell assets free and clear of future liabilities.
Senior lenders often insist that subordinate lenders assign to them, under subordination and intercreditor agreements, their right to vote on a plan of reorganization proposed for the borrower should it end up in chapter 11. The intention of such assignments is to prevent junior lenders from facilitating or preventing confirmation of bankruptcy plans contrary to the desires of senior lenders. Lenders should be aware, however, that courts disagree whether such plan voting rights assignments are enforceable. In fact, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Mas
One of the concerns for creditors dealing with a distressed company is the possibility of bankruptcy, and the risk that payments to the creditor on account of previously incurred debt will be avoided as a "preference" in the debtor's bankruptcy proceeding. Generally speaking, a "preference" is a transfer of the debtor's property on the eve of bankruptcy to satisfy an old debt. The Bankruptcy Code allows a bankrupt company to reach back 90 days and avoid any transfers made to creditors during that time, subject to certain defenses.