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
    Drafting error deprives creditors of benefit of bankruptcy estate assets
    2008-09-03

    The Fifth Circuit recently issued an opinion addressing an important issue with respect to the preservation of a debtor's causes of action in a Chapter 11 plan of reorganization. The Fifth Circuit held that a reorganized debtor lacked standing to pursue certain common-law claims that were based on the pre-confirmation management of the bankruptcy estate's assets.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, White & Case, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Unsecured debt, Breach of contract, Fraud, Fiduciary, Limited liability company, Res judicata and issue estoppel, Standing (law), Negligence, Liquidation, Common law, Collateral estoppel, Title 11 of the US Code, United States bankruptcy court, Fifth Circuit
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    White & Case
    Bankruptcy Appeals Court limits lien-stripping in § 363(b) asset sale
    2008-08-18

    The Ninth Circuit’s Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (the “BAP”) held on July 18, 2008, that the Bankruptcy Code (“Code”) did not authorize a bankruptcy court’s approving the sale of a debtor’s property free and clear of a junior lien outside the reorganization plan context. In re PW, LLC __ B.R. __, 2008 WL 2840659 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. July 18, 2008). It directed the bankruptcy court to ascertain on remand whether state law permitted a court to compel the junior lienholder to release its lien in exchange for payment of less than the face value of its claim. Id., at *13-*16.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Unsecured debt, Collateral (finance), Interest, Secured creditor, Trustee, Ninth Circuit, United States bankruptcy court, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
    Changes to Ohio’s 29-year-old exemption law
    2008-08-12

    The revisions to Ohio’s exemption law set forth in O.R.C. §2329.66 become effective on September 25, 2008 by Senate Bill 281 that was signed by Governor Strickland on June 27, 2008. The purpose of the changes to Ohio’s exemption law is to increase the exemptions for property that a debtor may hold exempt from execution, garnishment or sale for the satisfaction of a judgment. Ohio’s current exemptions have not been revised since 1979, and the current exemptions do not reflect the costs of living in 2008.

    Filed under:
    USA, Ohio, Insolvency & Restructuring, Bricker & Eckler LLP, Tax exemption, Credit (finance), Debtor, Testimony, Personal property, Economy, Consumer price index, Capital punishment, Earned income tax credit
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Bricker & Eckler LLP
    Petition Sixth Circuit holds that state court judgments that modify a discharge order are void ab initio
    2008-09-19

    On August 26, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that a state-court judgment that modifies a discharge order is void ab initio.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Bricker & Eckler LLP, Debtor, Injunction, Debt, Bankruptcy discharge, US Code, United States bankruptcy court, Sixth Circuit
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Bricker & Eckler LLP
    The U.S. Supreme Court addresses Bankruptcy Code exemption to stamp taxes
    2008-09-17

    Debtors operating under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection routinely sell some or all of their assets during the course of their bankruptcy case. As part of a bankruptcy court approved sale process, debtors often request that the court exempt such transfers from stamp taxes1 pursuant to Bankruptcy Code § 1146(a). The exemption generally reduces obligations encumbering a debtor’s property and allows for a greater portion of sale proceeds to be available for distribution to creditors.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Tax, Lowenstein Sandler LLP, Tax exemption, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Statutory interpretation, Liquidation, Balance sheet, Bright-line rule, Stamp duty, Title 11 of the US Code, Supreme Court of the United States, United States bankruptcy court, Third Circuit, Fourth Circuit
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Lowenstein Sandler LLP
    Investment bank/broker-dealer insolvencies
    2008-09-23

    In light of the recent Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing by Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and the subsequent determination of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) to commence a proceeding placing Lehman Brothers Inc.

    Filed under:
    USA, Banking, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Hogan Lovells, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Security (finance), Swap (finance), Margin (finance), Debt, Investment banking, Liquidation, Broker-dealer, Liquidator (law), US Securities and Exchange Commission, Lehman Brothers, Securities Investor Protection Corporation, Securities Exchange Act 1934 (USA), Title 11 of the US Code
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Hogan Lovells
    Lehman Brothers bankruptcy and sale
    2008-09-19

    As has been widely reported, on September 15, 2008, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. ("Lehman") filed for protection under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the "Bankruptcy Court"). Except for LB 745 LLC which is the Lehman entity that was formed to own Lehman's headquarters in New York, the other subsidiaries (the "Lehman Subsidiaries") of Lehman have not filed for bankruptcy protection as of the time of publication of this Alert.

    Filed under:
    USA, New York, Banking, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, BakerHostetler, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Limited liability company, Investment banking, Liability (financial accounting), Subsidiary, Lehman Brothers cases, Barclays, Lehman Brothers, Title 11 of the US Code, United States bankruptcy court
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    BakerHostetler
    Trading swap termination claims
    2008-10-06

    Nothing is certain in today's financial crisis - except that the legal system will be sorting out the rights and obligations of financial market participants for years to come. This is especially true for participants in the over-the-counter derivatives markets.

    Filed under:
    USA, Derivatives, Insolvency & Restructuring, Richards Kibbe & Orbe LLP, Bankruptcy, Clearing (finance), Credit (finance), Debtor, Unsecured debt, Collateral (finance), Swap (finance), Futures contract, Credit risk, Liability (financial accounting), Default (finance), International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Enron
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Richards Kibbe & Orbe LLP
    Actions taken in violation of the automatic stay are void... sometimes
    2008-10-02

    In Burkhart v. Coleman, (In re Tippett) --- F.3d ---, 2008 WL 4070690 (9th Cir. Sept. 4, 2008), the Ninth Circuit held that an unauthorized post-petition sale of real property may be upheld where: 1) the bankruptcy trustee failed to record the bankruptcy petition with the county recorder; and 2) a bona fide purchaser thereafter bought and recorded title in the property.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, Federal preemption, Debtor, Federal Reporter, Deed, Good faith, Deed of trust (real estate), US Code, Title 11 of the US Code, Ninth Circuit, United States bankruptcy court, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
    In the matter of Antonio Barboza, et al. v. New Form, Inc
    2008-10-01

    USCA Ninth Circuit, September 23, 2008

    Click here for a copy of the full decision.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Media & Entertainment, Loeb & Loeb LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Patent infringement, Copyright infringement, Debt, Cease and desist, Statutory damages, US Code, Title 11 of the US Code, Ninth Circuit, United States bankruptcy court, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Loeb & Loeb LLP

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 349
    • Page 350
    • Page 351
    • Page 352
    • Current page 353
    • Page 354
    • Page 355
    • Page 356
    • Page 357
    • …
    • 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