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
    Scottish Lion Insurance case - the lion still roars
    2010-02-04
    • Decision will be welcomed by insurers

    The Scottish Appeal Court has allowed the appeal by Scottish Lion Insurance against the judgment of Lord Glennie on whether it would ever be fair for a court to sanction a solvent scheme in the face of creditor opposition, says City law firm Reynolds Porter Chamberlain LLP (RPC).

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Scotland, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Litigation, RPC, Limited liability partnership, Involuntary dismissal, House of Lords, Court of Appeal of England & Wales
    Authors:
    Vivien Tyrell
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    RPC
    Furnisher Does Not Violate FCRA by Reporting Discharged Debt
    2016-08-09

    A district court in Nevada recently granted a mortgage company’s motion to dismiss FCRA claims where the reported debt had been discharged in bankruptcy.The opinion serves as a reminder of the rules governing the reporting of discharged debt.In Riekki v. Bayview Fin. Loan Servicing, the consumer alleged that the subject debt was discharged pursuant to his Chapter 13 bankruptcy and that the creditor continued to report balances through the pendency of the bankruptcy as well as post-petition.Riekki v. Bayview Financial Loan Servicing, 2:15-cv-2427, 2016 U.S. Dist.

    Filed under:
    USA, Nevada, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Smith Debnam Narron Drake Saintsing & Myers LLP, Bankruptcy, Debt, Mortgage loan, Involuntary dismissal, Credit score, Bankruptcy discharge
    Authors:
    Caren Enloe
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Smith Debnam Narron Drake Saintsing & Myers LLP
    Hosking v Apax Partners LLP (unreported - 19 July 2016)
    2016-07-27

    The English Court refused an application by Liquidators to stay English proceedings pending the outcome of similar proceedings in the US.

    The Joint Liquidators of a Luxembourg company ("the Company") applied to stay English proceedings that they had brought against private equity investors ("the Defendants") until similar proceedings in the US had been resolved, or for three months to enable the Liquidators to raise finance for the litigation.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Ashfords LLP, Private equity, Fraud, Limited liability partnership, Personal jurisdiction, Debt, Involuntary dismissal, Refinancing, Default (finance), Insolvency Act 1986 (UK)
    Authors:
    Alan Bennett , Olivia Bridger
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Ashfords LLP
    State law conspiracy and tortious interference claims were properly removed because they "arose in" bankruptcy
    2010-04-28

    IN RE: REPOSITORY TECHNOLOGIES, INC

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Kelley Drye & Warren LLP, Federal preemption, Bankruptcy, Abuse of process, Tortious interference, Vacated judgment, Remand (court procedure), Involuntary dismissal, Bad faith, Prejudice, United States bankruptcy court
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Kelley Drye & Warren LLP
    Plaintiffs with pre-existing products claims against automaker cannot disturb bankruptcy sale
    2010-04-29

    federal court in New York has dismissed as moot an appeal filed by plaintiffs with products liability claims pending against General Motors Corp. (GM) before it was sold in bankruptcy. In re: Motors Liquidation Co., No. 09 Civ. 6818 (U.S. Dist. Ct., S.D.N.Y., decided April 13, 2010). The plaintiffs sought to overturn a bankruptcy court’s approval of the automaker’s sale “free and clear” of their existing products liability claims as well as any successor liability claims they may have against the “new” GM.

    Filed under:
    USA, New York, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Product Regulation & Liability, Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP, Bankruptcy, Unsecured debt, Liquidation, Good faith, Involuntary dismissal, General Motors, United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for the Southern District of New York
    Authors:
    Greg Fowler
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
    Single-purpose entities and independent directors: does the general growth ruling change structured finance?
    2010-05-11

    A recent Delaware bankruptcy court decision1 on the ability of “bankruptcy remote” single-purpose entities emphasizes the complicated nature of the bankruptcy process and the issues that need to be considered when using “bankruptcy remote” entities in funding structures. Given the prevalence of such entities, this is an important decision for all participants in the structured fi nance industry.

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Securitization & Structured Finance, Vedder Price PC, Bankruptcy, Collateral (finance), Liquidation, Voting, Involuntary dismissal, Bad faith, Refinancing, Secured creditor, Subsidiary, The Independent, United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    John T. Bycraft
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Vedder Price PC
    Motion to dismiss Lehman-related securities class action denied
    2010-05-28

    Judge John Koeltl in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently denied a motion to dismiss a securities class action arising, in part, from the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy filing.

    Filed under:
    USA, Banking, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Bankruptcy, Surety, Class action, Maturity (finance), Involuntary dismissal, Lehman Brothers cases, US Securities and Exchange Commission, Verizon Communications, Lehman Brothers, Securities Exchange Act 1934 (USA), US District Court for the Southern District of New York
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
    Issuer's failure to disclose Lehman investment is grounds for lawsuit
    2010-05-24

    On May 17th, a federal district court denied motions to dismiss a securities fraud lawsuit alleging that defendants failed to disclose adequately their investment in notes issued by a shell company owned by Lehman Brothers, who provided the principal protection guarantee. Defendants' knowledge regarding the notes and Lehman's insolvency contradicted their public statements, satisfying Rule 10b-5's scienter requirements. Plaintiffs also allege that their losses were exaggerated by defendants' lack of disclosure, adequately alleging loss causation.

    Filed under:
    USA, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Winston & Strawn LLP, Discovery, Involuntary dismissal, Causation (law), Securities fraud, Lehman Brothers
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Winston & Strawn LLP
    Improper involuntary bankruptcy petition gives rise to award of counsel fees
    2010-06-16

    In Orange Blossom Limited Partnership v. Southern California Sunbelt Developers Inc.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, Punitive damages, Bankruptcy, Costs in English law, Debtor, Good faith, Involuntary dismissal, Attorney's fee, US Code, Ninth Circuit, United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    David J. McMahon
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP
    Supreme Court further defines the time limitations for objections to exemptions in bankruptcy
    2010-06-22

    In Schwab v. Reilly, the United States Supreme Court recently reversed a decision from the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals regarding the need for a bankruptcy trustee to lodge an objection to an exemption where the property is actually worth more than the amount claimed by the exemption. The Supreme Court took the opportunity in this case to also clarify its prior ruling in Taylor v.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd, Tax exemption, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Liquidation, Involuntary dismissal, Trustee, Supreme Court of the United States, United States bankruptcy court, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    L. Kathleen Harrell-Latham
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • Page 1
    • Current page 2
    • Page 3
    • Page 4
    • Page 5
    • Page 6
    • Page 7
    • 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