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
    Delaware Supreme Court holds creditors of insolvent LLCs do not have derivative standing
    2012-03-15

    CML V, LLC v. Bax, et al., 2011 Del. LEXIS 480 (Del. Sept. 2, 2011)

    CASE SNAPSHOT

    Affirming the decision of the Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware, the Delaware Supreme Court held that, unlike corporate creditors, creditors of a Delaware Limited Liability Company do not have standing to sue the LLC’s officers derivatively on behalf of an insolvent LLC.  

    FACTUAL BACKGROUND

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Reed Smith LLP, Limited liability company, Standing (law), Balance sheet, Internal control, Derivative suit, Court of Chancery, Delaware Supreme Court, Court of equity
    Authors:
    Kathleen A. Murphy
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Reed Smith LLP
    Delaware Supreme Court curtails rights of creditors to bring derivative suits against insolvent Delaware LLCs
    2012-02-01

    If you are a creditor of a Delaware limited liability company and wish to pursue derivative claims on behalf of an insolvent company against the company’s present or former managers based on breaches of fiduciary duties, you may be out of luck. The Delaware Supreme Court recently decided in CML V LLC v. Bax, 2011 Del. LEXIS 480 (Sept. 2, 2011), that creditors’ rights against limited liability companies differ from those against corporations.

    Filed under:
    USA, Company & Commercial, Corporate Finance/M&A, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Fiduciary, Limited liability company, Standing (law), Internal control, Secured creditor, Derivative suit, Delaware Supreme Court
    Authors:
    Michael P. Pompeo
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
    Creditors of LLC lack standing to bring derivative claims
    2012-01-31

    In CML V, LLC v. Bax, No. 735, 2010 (Del. Sept. 6, 2011), the Delaware Supreme Court held that a creditor of an insolvent LLC, unlike a creditor of an insolvent corporation, does not possess standing to pursue derivative claims. CML, which had lent money to a jet leasing company that later became insolvent, brought a derivative action charging that the company’s officers had engaged in mismanagement and selfinterested transactions.

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Jenner & Block LLP, Limited liability company, Standing (law), Delaware Supreme Court
    Authors:
    Terrence J. Truax , Brent Caslin , Joseph A. Saltiel , Jeffrey A. Koppy
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Jenner & Block LLP
    Decision in Visteon walks through analysis of improper venue and venue transfer decisions
    2011-11-14

    Summary

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fox Rothschild LLP, Bankruptcy, Witness, Delaware Supreme Court, United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    L. John Bird
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Fox Rothschild LLP
    In the matter of Krafft-Murphy Company, Inc., C.A. no. 6049-VCP (Del. Ch. Nov. 9, 2011) (Parsons, V.C.)
    2011-11-15

    In this memorandum opinion, the Court of Chancery denied a motion filed on behalf of a dissolved corporation to dismiss a petition for the appointment of a receiver under 8 Del. C. § 279, ruling that the petitioners might “conceivably” demonstrate entitlement to such appointment in light of their factual allegations concerning the dissolved corporation’s “plan of dissolution” under 8 Del. C. § 281(b). The Court also granted the petitioners’ motion to perfect service upon the dissolved corporation and denied the motion to dismiss for insufficiency of service of process.

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Liability insurance, Dissolution (law), Memorandum opinion, Delaware General Corporation Law, Court of Chancery, Delaware Supreme Court
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP
    Bankruptcy Court values captive reinsurance subsidiary of Washington Mutual
    2011-11-10

    Recently, the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware denied the request of Washington Mutual and WMI Investment Corp. (collectively the Debtors) for confirmation of the Modified Sixth Amended Joint Plain of Affiliated Debtors. Among a number of issues, the Bankruptcy Court determined that the valuation of a captive reinsurance subsidiary (WM Mortgage Reinsurance Company – currently in run-off), which would serve as the most valuable asset of the proposed reorganized debtor was flawed.

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Litigation, Jorden Burt LLP, Debtor, Mortgage loan, Mediation, Reinsurance, Subsidiary, Discounted cash flow, Delaware Supreme Court, United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for District of Delaware
    Authors:
    John Black
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Jorden Burt LLP
    Amico disputes cash holdings in Manhattan Re rehabilitation
    2011-10-17

    In response to a rehabilitation plan for Delaware insurance company Manhattan Re proposed by its receiver, American Motorists Insurance Company (a reinsurer of Manhattan Re) filed objections with the Delaware Court of Chancery. AMICO argued that the plan should be rejected because the receiver improperly intended to dispose of certain cash holdings that AMICO claimed constituted cash collateral under its reinsurance agreements with the company.

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Litigation, Jorden Burt LLP, Collateral (finance), Arbitration clause, Preliminary injunction, Reinsurance, Delaware Court of Chancery, Delaware Supreme Court
    Authors:
    John Black
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Jorden Burt LLP
    Lehman Brothers court, building on Semcrude and Swedbank decisions, denies triangular setoff by swap counterparty
    2011-10-11

    The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the Court), has held that section 553(a) of the Bankruptcy Code prohibits a swap counterparty from setting off amounts owed to the debtor against amounts owed by the debtor to affiliates of the counterparty, notwithstanding the safe harbor provision in section 561 of the Bankruptcy Code and language in the ISDA Master Agreement permitting the swap counterparty to effect “triangular” setoffs. In re Lehman Brothers Inc., Case No. 08-01420 (JMP)(SIPA) (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. October 4, 2011).

    Filed under:
    USA, New York, Derivatives, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Collateral (finance), Safe harbor (law), Swap (finance), Debt, Common law, UBS, Lehman Brothers, Title 11 of the US Code, Delaware Supreme Court, United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for the Southern District of New York
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
    Bankruptcy Court for Southern District of New York prohibits triangular setoff provided for in safe harbored contract
    2011-10-12

    On October 4, 2011, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that a contractual right of a triangular (non-mutual) setoff was unenforceable in bankruptcy, even though the contract was safe harbored. In re Lehman Brothers, Inc., No. 08-01420 (JMP), 2011 WL 4553015 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Oct. 4, 2011).

    Filed under:
    USA, New York, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Collateral (finance), Safe harbor (law), Swap (finance), Debt, Concession (contract), Standing (law), Liquidation, Common law, UBS, Lehman Brothers, Title 11 of the US Code, Trustee, Delaware Supreme Court, United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for the Southern District of New York
    Authors:
    Mark C. Ellenberg
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
    Lehman bankruptcy court denies contractual right to three-party setoff in bankruptcy
    2011-10-05

    The Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York has held that a cross-affiliate netting provision in an ISDA swap agreement is unenforceable in bankruptcy. In the SIPA proceedings of Lehman Brothers Inc. (LBI), UBS AG (UBS) sought to offset UBS’s obligation to return excess collateral to LBI against claims purportedly owed by LBI to UBS subsidiaries, UBS Securities and UBS Financial Services.

    Filed under:
    USA, New York, Derivatives, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Mayer Brown, Bankruptcy, Collateral (finance), Foreign exchange market, Swap (finance), Concession (contract), Common law, Subsidiary, UBS, International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Lehman Brothers, Title 11 of the US Code, Delaware Supreme Court, United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for the Southern District of New York
    Authors:
    Howard S. Beltzer , Brian Trust
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Mayer Brown

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 4
    • Page 5
    • Page 6
    • Page 7
    • Current page 8
    • Page 9
    • Page 10
    • Page 11
    • Page 12
    • …
    • 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