What happens when the counterparties on both sides of a contract are debtors in separate bankruptcy cases and their estates have contrary views about whether to reject or assume a contract?
As we previously reported here at the Weil Bankruptcy Blog, in Burberry Limited and Burberry USA v.
Unsecured Creditors and Postpetition Interest – the EFH Court’s Analysis
Generally when parties to a dispute work out a settlement they can breathe a sigh of relief and put their differences behind them. OK – it’s a little more complicated than that when one of the parties is a chapter 11 debtor that must seek relief from the bankruptcy court to approve the settlement. But what if a party objects? Things get a bit more complicated. And what if the objecting party has no apparent pecuniary interest at stake? In that scenario, the settling parties can rest a little easier as the bankruptcy court in
After a busy term last Spring that saw the United States Supreme Court issue decisions in Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett and Baker Botts v.
Section 303(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code allows an involuntary petition to be filed by three or more creditors who hold non-contingent claims totaling at least $15,325 more than the liens on the debtor’s property. Those creditors then must prove that the debtor was generally not paying its debts as they came due within the guidelines
“So many years we’ve tried
To keep our love alive
But baby it ain’t over ’til it’s over”
-Lenny Kravitz – “It Ain’t Over ’Til It’s Over”